I would like to deploy a nestacms blog on webbynode by using the webbynode gem as allways I do with rails. Altough Webbynode seem to support Sinatra and Rack application easily, I get a WARNING during deployment stating that the application will not run smoothly because it lacks a public folder:
WARNING: Missing public folder in your Rack app, it'll not run smoothly!
Actually the rapid application development (RAPP webbynode gem) sets the need of a public folder into the Nginx configuration:
server {
listen 80;
server_name super_duper_blog.webbyapp.com ;
root /var/rapp/super_duper_blog/public/;
passenger_enabled on;
}
Instead this is my nestacms config.ru:
require 'rubygems'
require 'bundler/setup'
Bundler.require(:default)
require 'nesta/app'
Nesta::App.root = ::File.expand_path('.', ::File.dirname(__FILE__))
run Nesta::App
It would be nice if the author and SO user Graham Ashton could jump in and help me. Anyway, how could I get around the problem?
UPDATE
After creating the project, with nesta new you nedd to:
Create a public folder manually
Add some content in it. Say for ex. humnans.txt and favicon.ico
git add . and git commit -m "added public with humans and favicon"
wn push
And your nestacms website will go on line at a private webbynode address (blog.webbyapp.com)
Then you can use wn changedns www.example.com to make your site available for the masses
I've never used webbynode, so I'm not sure quite how its set up. Have you seen the Nginx passenger install guide? Could be useful:
http://modrails.com/documentation/Users%20guide%20Nginx.html#deploying_a_rack_app
It says you need public/ and tmp/, so I'm inclined to believe it.
Did you try making these directories yourself? Does the site actually start up? How are you deploying your site to the webbynode?
All my Sinatra apps are deployed with Vlad (see http://effectif.com/articles/deploying-sinatra-with-vlad) which takes care of creating public/ and tmp/ for you. It also touches tmp/restart.txt (see the Passenger guide I linked to above) when you deploy a new version of the site if you tell it that you're using Passenger. Capistrano also works fine (and is more extensively documented these days).
Related
I'm trying to set up a loadbalancer that would redirect to specific version of an application certein users. So far i was using Blue/Green deployment strategy (so once i made new version of an app i created new environment and redirected traffic there). Now i would like to change this approach. I want to be able to specify users (more experienced or whatever) that would see new site after authentication while the others would still be redirected to old one. If something goes wrong with new version all users will see old version. Currently my loadbalancing is made in apache and authentication is done on application level. So is this even possible? I know i could hardcode it in application but what if there is a bug in new feature and new users are still being redirected there? I would then need to stop application for all users and rollback to old version and that's bad i guess. I was thinking about using external CAS however didnt find any information if it would be possible then. So i would like to ask is it possible and are there any tools (maybe some apache plugin) for that purpose?
Here's a working solution with nginx
create conf.d/balancer.conf
put the code into it (see below)
docker run -p8080:8080 -v ~/your_path/conf.d:/etc/nginx/conf.d openresty/openresty:alpine
use curl to play with it
balancer.conf:
map $cookie_is_special_user $upstream {
default http://example.com;
~^1$ http://scooterlabs.com/echo;
}
server {
listen 8080;
resolver 8.8.8.8;
location / {
proxy_pass $upstream;
}
}
testing
curl --cookie "is_special_user=1" http://localhost:8080
It would return the contents of scooterlabs.com dumping the request it receives
curl http://localhost:8080
Produces the contents of example.com
explanation
the idea is that you set a special cookie to the users you treat as special by the backend app after they get authorized as usual
of course it would only work if both app versions are served on the same domain so that the cookie is seen by both versions
after that you balance them to a desired server depending on the cookie value
you can easily disable such routing by tweaking your nginx config file
with this approach you can come up with even more complex scenarios like setting random cookie values in the range 1-10 and then gradually switching some of the special users in your config file i.e. start with those having value 1, after that 1-2 etc
I have a ZF3 project with a controller which opens excel-files and compares them with an template which will be openened, too.
On my development notebook (xampp) everything works fine, at my production system (ubuntu) the phpspreadsheet causes errors (I think it is the one).
here a snippet from my code:
$fileName="./public/files/" . $fileName; //.\ neu
echo $fileName;
$template= new Spreadsheet();
$importdcl= new Spreadsheet();
$template= \PhpOffice\PhpSpreadsheet\IOFactory::load('./public/files/Template_DCL_final.xlsx');
$importdcl= \PhpOffice\PhpSpreadsheet\IOFactory::load( $fileName);
echo "filename geladen";
I already have the folders in non relative paths because basePath() doesn't work, it won't give any result.
The echo statement is just because the server log won't give any errors. On my development system I get the echo text on my production system the error seems to be at the load statements.
First question: How could I use relative paths in here?
Second question: How can I get an idea wether is something wrong with the spreadsheet class?
This is what composer loaded:
"phpoffice/phpspreadsheet" : "dev-develop",
Is it a problem, because it has this dev version? At this point I'm quite confused because I played with the pathes of the files, I changed the rights manually in the folder, I checked server logs and now I don't have any idea left.
Here the rights in the folder:
Any helpful suggestions appreciated.
Answer (hopefully) to the first question: if your application is based on ZendSkeletonApplication, then you can use paths relative to your application root (from index.php):
/**
* This makes our life easier when dealing with paths. Everything is relative
* to the application root now.
*/
chdir(dirname(__DIR__));
So if your data files are located in <application root>/public/files, then you should be able to read them from controller/service/etc. using public/files/<file name> path. You can test it with eg. the file_exists function.
I’m unable to answer your second question, but here are some suggestions (OK, questions…):
what is the status code of your (production) server’s response?
Do you have read/write permissions to the data files from the server’s account (www-data?)?
Does phpspreadsheet depend on any PHP extensions? Do you have them installed on both your development machine and the server?
What PHP version is installed on the server? Do you or phpspreadsheet use any features that may be unavailable on that version?
Try running your project not through Apache, but with PHP’s builtin server (but don’t do it long-term) and try to reproduce the issue.
I'm trying to figure out the correct way to architect a solution to automatically configure new Rails App servers.
I've looked at the chef-rails cookbook and it seems a little verbose. In our case we always deploy Nginx a certain way, always perform backups a certain way, etc, so much of the configuration would be redundant from one node definition to the next.
My goal is to be able to create a new Rails App server by defining just the following information.
wh_webhead "test_app" do
ssl :enable
backups :enable
passenger :enable
ruby_version 2.0.0
db_type :mysql
db_user "testuser"
db_pass "3207496r9w6"
nagios_ssl_string_match "login"
end
Then I would like Chef to perform the following actions:
Create user accounts
Setup box and install
Install Nginx w/wildcard SSL cert
Configure log rotation
Setup firewall rules to allow traffic to ports 80 and 443
Install Passenger and RVM with Ruby 2.0.0
Create Rails app dirs following template (e.g. /opt/local/test_app)
Create new database on MySQL server, grant access, and setup firewall rules
Create firewall rules for Nagios and configure Nagios to monitor:
port 80 for redirection to port 443
port 443 for HTTP 200 status
port 443 for the text "login"
Configure backups for app dir (e.g. /opt/local/test_app)
I'm already using the community cookbooks for Nginx, Nagios, Ufw, etc and have created recipes in a custom cookbook to configure Mysql and Nginx. There's just a lot of duplicate code from one app's Nginx/Mysql cookbook to the next.
What I'm struggling with is where to use Cookbooks, Recipes, LWRPs and Definitions to properly abstract this.
Should I put the default configuration for Nginx and Mysql in Definitions and then use those in recipes or create custom wrapper cookbooks with the defaults?
First, take a look at the application_ruby and artifact cookbook, both of which can automate these workflows for you.
I specifically enjoy using the artifact cookbook, as it provides a lot of flexibility, but the application_ruby cookbook has built-in support for Passenger, Unicorn and other tools you'd normally find in a Rails application requirements.
As for your question regarding Cookbooks, Recipes, LWRPs and Definitions I would definitely look at #sethvargo's answer at https://stackoverflow.com/a/21733093/747032. It provides a good guide on what to use when, from an employee at Opscode (now called Chef (the company)), and someone who is constantly involved in the Chef community and thus has excellent knowledge on this topic.
As far as my advice (which I'll keep concise):
Use LWRP's to wrap a lot of resources that are always called together, for example, we use an "AWS EBS" LWRP, to create, mount and format new EBS'.
Use recipes to call on all your LWRP's (both custom and public) and resources.
Don't use definitions, they are really deprecated by LWRP's in my opinion.
I am trying to setup ASP.Net MVC 2 application on Linux environment. I've installed Ubuntu 10.10 on VirtualBox, then installed Mono 2.8 from sources. After that I have installed nginx and configure it as recommended here.
Unfortunately, FastCGI shows me standard error 500 page:
No Application Found
Unable to find a matching application for request:
Host localhost:80
Port 80
Request Path /Default.aspx
Physical Path /var/www/mvc/Default.aspx
My application is located in /var/www/mvc directory. I've tried to create some stub Default.aspx file and place it in root dir of my application, but it didn't help, same error occured.
Thanks.
I've been doing some testing with this as well, using all ubuntu10.10 binaries.
From what I can make from it, either nginx fails to pass the hostname of the mono server fails to receive it over the fastcgi protocol. Anyhow, the tutorial line:
fastcgi-mono-server2 /applications=www.domain1.xyz:/:/var/www/www.domain1.xyz/ /socket=tcp:127.0.0.1:9000
doesn't work. Removing the hostname makes the thing work:
fastcgi-mono-server2 /applications=/:/var/www/www.domain1.xyz/ /socket=tcp:127.0.0.1:9000
but this of course blocks the use of multiple virtual mono hosts.
Since you are running ASP.NET MVC 2 application you should use fastcgi-mono-server4.
Adding following line in /etc/nginx/fastcgi_param resolves the issue for me. It also allows to use multiple virtual hosts.
fastcgi_param HTTP_HOST $host;
Does your application work with xsp (xsp4 if you are using .net 4.0)? You'll want to make sure that is working before you try configuring the connection to another web server.
Does nginx know where to find mono? You most likely have a parallel install and it won't be in the default paths.
I use apache, but you may still find some of the instructions on my blog useful:
http://tqcblog.com/2010/04/02/ubuntu-subversion-teamcity-mono-2-6-and-asp-net-mvc/
I had this problem just now, I too had been following the document on the mono site:
I was trying to start the fastcgi-mono-server as it suggested:
sudo fastcgi-mono-server4 /applications=www.domain1.xyz:/:/var/www/www.domain1.xyz/ /socket=tcp:127.0.0.1:9000 &
However when I did it like that I got the same problem as you. I changed it to this:
sudo fastcgi-mono-server4 /applications=/:/var/www/www.domain1.xyz/ /socket=tcp:127.0.0.1:9000 &
And it worked ( I had to type in www.domain1.xyz/Home/Index to see my MVC page, not worked out how to stop it looking for www.domain1.xyz/default.aspx yet XD ).
You need to make sure the domain set in your site config matches the domain passed to the fastcgi server. So for example if your default site (/etc/nginx/sites-enabled/default) has the following config:
server {
...
server_name www.domain1.xyz;
...
}
You would need to pass that domain into the fastcgi server:
sudo fastcgi-mono-server4 /applications=www.domain1.xyz:/:/var/www/www.domain1.xyz/ ...
Then when you access the site it will obviously need to be with that domain you set.
Hi Zend framework guys,
I have a question for you :
There is production , development , testing etc that we can set .
I assume we have 3 different db for these .
But I have a doubt how do we access the url for testers and developers ?
Do we need to pass as a GET value and set whether its development , or for testing ? Or is there any other way ?
http://localhost/ is the url and I am the developer who uses it, How do we give the url for testers ? I am not a server admin , so if you guys have some other techniques using the same code base ?
Or do I want to have 3 code base itself for testing , development , production etc . For production its OK :) , but just an example .
The question was asked by some of my friends when I introduced them #ZF , but I was not sure whether I am right when passing it as a GET value and setting it .
ie like site/?version=dev or something like that :) . If you have an answer I love to hear .
Edit :
I was looking for a way like #David Weinraub says "Are you saying you want to use a single virtual host, a single location, but be able to force the execution context into dev, testing, production mode? That's kind of unusual."
Answer by #Iznogood is also right . But I was looking for a way #David Weinraub says . So marking it as correct for its a kind of unusual.
Thank you guys for your helps.
Are you saying you want to use a single virtual host, a single location, but be able to force the execution context into dev, testing, production mode? That's kind of unusual.
If not, that is, if you will deploy dev, testing, production to different servers and (which strikes me as the more common arrangement), I agree with #izogood: Issue your SetEnv directive either in .htaccess or upstream at the vhost level.
Since many of my projects don't have a formal "build process" - just a straight FTP upload, often to shared hosting; kind of basic, I know - I prefer to keep my .htaccess free of deployment-specific content. As a result, I tend to issue the SetEnv directive at the vhost level on my local dev machine, and then let the APP_ENVIRONMENT constant - defined in public/index.php - default to 'production'.
in your .htaccess if you use one thereshould be
SetEnv APPLICATION_ENV production
Wich is where you would switch between the different environment.
So on your stagin server its
SetEnv APPLICATION_ENV staging
on your dev server
SetEnv APPLICATION_ENV development
etc...
Assuming you setup your db in application.ini.