Using simplescript to manage scripts...beware of its limits

[tsnyder91]

Hey all,
I have domain tsnyder91.net and after getting an e-mail from hostmonster a while back strongly suggesting using simplescripts to manage the scripts you have rather than fantastico, I transitioned to use simplescripts. It has a cool interface and an upgrade option that takes care of it all for you and updates to scripts are added much quicker than fantastico so you can get the latest code base faster, which means more secure and latest features of the code.

Even though I'm a web programmer, I'd rather have a script to automate some of the more routine functions of running a website.

I use Joomla and it recently went to 1.5.4 I switched to simplescripts when it was 1.5.3 so a month ago maybe. I have a lot of pictures and use coppermine gallery and a photo gallery in joomla to host these family event pictures. I have a few(maybe 4 or 5) mp3 sermons from my old pastor too.

When I hit upgrade in simplescript it started its process and would time out on the backup part. I don't really care about backups of core files since I know my way around joomla (I program on it for my job at wayfm.com), but I didn't find an option to turn that off. So I tried to do it again, and again it timed out. tried again, time out. So I stopped. Then a little later I get an e-mail from hostmonster saying I was deactivated due to "site causing performance problems".

I talked to support chat and it turns out there were multiple tar processes trying to backup my site running(tar is a zip command for linux OS's) so the performance problems were caused not by my site's code or anything I was running on the site, but instead by simplescript timing out on the backup step trying to backup my site, which included all the pictures and mp3's i had in my images directory for joomla.

So long story short, I would avoid at all costs using simplescript if you have a lot of photos and large sites, My site was maybe 1-2 gig when all files are accounted for. I have opened a ticket to the abuse department and hope to hear back soon. But until then I wanted to get the word out that if you have large site, upgrade your scripts manually or use fantastico. I don't want anyone else to get their sites canceled over using a service(simplescripts) that hostmonster prefers.

Regards,
tsnyder91

[tsnyder91]

Thankfully my site is reinstated. They suggested the same thing I put in my previous post. If your site is that large or too intensive on simplescript. upgrade manually. I would add that Fantastico could still be used as well since Fantastico doesn't do a backup to my knowledge prior to upgrading the software.

[Falcon1986]

Thanks for sharing your experience with us. This will probably do Joomla users well when they are considering an upgrade.

There is a separate backup feature that can be used within cPanel. It will back up files and directory structure of your account and even your databases which you can download to your PC.

I can see where using an automated script installation front-end such as SimpleScripts can be quicker and easier for someone who does not have time to waste or does not want to deal with manually installing, but I find that doing it manually gives you the ability to learn more about the script you are working with (in this case it is a CMS).

As a first-time installation, using SimpleScripts may not be a problem. However, I too would recommend that upgrades be done manually by following the instructions as given by the application's/script's upgrade documentation. A little bit of time spent reading and doing things the proper way will definitely pay off in the long term not only in giving you more experience, but also when it comes to dealing with those little problems that may crop up which your automated script manager failed to fix.

Additionally, installing or upgrading your web applications manually should not be a daunting task because you feel that your site is too large. Rarely are the core application files that need manipulation a significant part of site's size; the content you add, which usually does not need to be manipulated anyway, takes up the majority of space.

[shadmego]

I would also recommend to people that even doing a manual backup of your site when it's that large should be done with extreme caution.

I don't know what would have happened to your site if you had let the process keep running, but if you said it timed out, the script probably hit its limit for runtime on HM. But if you do have multiple tar processes running, I can definately see how that would make HM mad.

This leads me to another question ...

What happens when someone is trying to perform a manual backup of their site(s) and databases?? If your site gets that large (and mine is approaching that) how can we reasonably perform the all important function of backup?

~regards ... glad to hear you got your site back and thanks for the heads up.

[Falcon1986]

@'shadmego':

This may seem like the long and difficult way of performing backups of large sites, but you could try doing incremental small-chunk backups of the portions of your site where changes rarely take place, if they do at all. End with backing up your constantly changing portions. As time goes on, you can probably just make more regular backups of your frequently-modified portions without having to worry about the static portions.

This is the same thing I do with my Wordpress-driven site. When I make changes to the core Wordpress installation (which is rare) I create a compressed backup maintaining the file structure. Other than that, I arrange for the Wordpress installation to send me a database backup as an e-mail attachment every month.

There is also the less technical way of downloading all of your files via FTP, but overuse may flag you for bandwidth abuse.

[shadmego]

It is long and difficult, but it also underscores the importance of having a backup plan in place and sticking with it.

[pghcollectibles]

maybe a cron could be set up to scan and tar one folder at a time. which makes me wonder... is there a time stamp on any file? ie: in the windows :( (that i have grown to know so well) there is a "modified on" date that can be used to search for files. perhaps if linux does this as well then searches could be done to only tar modified folders? this might be done easier, if its possible, with ssh?

[r2b2]

If you wanted to do this, you'd want to look at find - here's the "man page (http://www.linuxmanpages.com/man1/find.1.php)" for it. Specifically you'd want to take a look at -mtime.

This (http://linuxgazette.net/111/tag/4.html) page goes into more detail too...