However, our major concern for Orbeon Multitenancy is scalability. If you're going multi-tenant, make sure you test this early ;-).
Biggest problem with getting it to a scalable state so far is that for some things, orbeon seems very slow (pdf generation and email sending, among others), Although this may be related to form-size of our test forms; performance will need to be watched carefully if we want to achieve sublineair scalability and a good end user experience.
Also: security: role-based is very necessary, but the addition of user-based, as discussed in another thread, is something that will probably be have to added in multi-tenant environment.
On that, I was curious: how hard would it be to make a version of the fr summary view that shows a user's submissions accross forms, instead of a form's across users? Supposing the persistency layer would already be built to support it and provide a restfull interface endpoint like POST "/search/username[optional: /app/form]"
Sincerely,
Koen VanderkimpenConnect:
From: Erik Bruchez <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Date: 30/06/2012 07:14
Subject: [ops-users] Re: Re: Re: Re: Multi-tenancy
Sent by: [hidden email]
Yes I think you could assign to each client a Form Runner "app", and
target a different database for each.
-Erik
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 7:47 AM, Jan Penninkhof <[hidden email]> wrote:
> You are totally right. Sharing database is very likely to be a no-no.
> However, looking at Orbeons REST API and the fact each application/form can
> be connected to a different database, makes it appear like Orbeon was made
> for storing application-level (or tenant-level) data in various back-end
> systems. What do you think?
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 12:34 PM, DL <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I'll have to grapple with this multiple domain issue at some stage (when
>> deploying to cloud) so I guess now is a time to think about it.
>>
>> However on first reading the jury still seems to be out on multitenancy
>> architectures.
>>
>>
>>
>> > Was just playing with the thought that if you would assign each tenant
>> > an
>> > Orbeon "application", you may have a good foundation already.
>> >
>>
>> One problem surely is ensuring security between tenants' databases.
>>
>> Tenants may not be too happy about sharing their data under the same roof
>> (same database) as other tenants.
>>
>> Searching for "multiple databases" on eXist forum ..
>>
>>
>> http://exist.2174344.n4.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=search_page&node=2174345&query=multiple+databases
>>
>> Here is one thread ...
>>
>>
>> http://exist.2174344.n4.nabble.com/Multiple-physical-database-instances-td2187710.html
>>
>> and see this request ..
>>
>>
>>
>> > If you make use of more than one eXist-db instance in the same JVM then
>> > we
>> > would like to hear about it
>> >
>>
>>
>> http://exist.2174344.n4.nabble.com/Request-for-Use-Cases-of-Multiple-eXist-db-instances-in-same-JVM-td3350280.html#a3350433
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://orbeon-forms-ops-users.24843.n4.nabble.com/Multi-tenancy-tp4655340p4655380.html
>> Sent from the Orbeon Forms (ops-users) mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>> --
>> You receive this message as a subscriber of the [hidden email] mailing
>> list.
>> To unsubscribe: [hidden email]
>> For general help: [hidden email]
>> OW2 mailing lists service home page: http://www.ow2.org/wws
>>
>
>
>
> --
> You receive this message as a subscriber of the [hidden email] mailing
> list.
> To unsubscribe: [hidden email]
> For general help: [hidden email]
> OW2 mailing lists service home page: http://www.ow2.org/wws
>
--
You receive this message as a subscriber of the [hidden email] mailing list.
To unsubscribe: [hidden email]
For general help: [hidden email]
OW2 mailing lists service home page: http://www.ow2.org/wws
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |