Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 41
  1. #1

    Lightbulb Site5's Flashback!?

    Flashback lets you restore up-to-the-second backups of files, retrieve any past version of any file in the history of your site, restore your entire site, go "back in time" to any point in your site's history, and much more. Once you've used Flashback, you'll never work without it again!
    - site5.com


    Reading this makes my mouth drool. Up to the second backups? Wow....

    Anyone experienced with this newly released software first hand made by site5? I'm guessing site5 will probably make this there biggest selling point, since they have given it its own site! http://www.whatisflashback.com/. Now I leave it up to cPanel to integrate something this cool

  2. #2
    Wow that sounds like an awesome feature. I know a solid backup solution is something that has been missing from most of the big hosting providers. Site5 might actually be on the path to being a great all round host
    A Collection of Web Hosts
    Small biographies on hosts, uptime reports and some reviews
    Feel free to add your review or add a host that isn't on the list.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Under Your Skin
    Posts
    5,875
    I'm looking at their plans... that flashback looks like a bunch of marketing hype.

    They do have some really cool features, like multi-site that I like....
    Windows 10 to Linux and Mac OSX: I'm PARSECs better than you. Eat my dust!!!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Under Your Skin
    Posts
    5,875
    I'm looking at their plans... that flashback looks like a bunch of marketing hype. Site5 has a bunch of marketing hype on the site... take 10 minutes and read the site. They have done a great job in that regard.

    They do have some really cool features, like multi-site that I like... if it lives up to the claims.... I suggest anyone visit the site5 forums and read between the lines of offerings.... like the new email... really open source they tagged site5 exclusive.... and the opensource is in alpha...
    Last edited by hekwu; 12-08-2005 at 10:45 PM.
    Windows 10 to Linux and Mac OSX: I'm PARSECs better than you. Eat my dust!!!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    24,009
    Quote Originally Posted by hekwu
    I'm looking at their plans... that flashback looks like a bunch of marketing hype.
    Well they certianly know how to drum up awareness.

    To me the Flashback thingie doesn't look like a backup tool. It looks more like a backup_your_site_at_a_certian_previous_version kinda tool. I'm sure some folks could find that useful, although I'm really trying to think why would anyone want to have the ability to revert their site back to an earlier version.

    Could make for some interesting discussion though, and it's good to see hosts trying new things.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by hekwu
    I'm looking at their plans... that flashback looks like a bunch of marketing hype.

    They do have some really cool features, like multi-site that I like....
    Marketing could very well play a factor in this new feature, them being the only host I know off the top of my head offering this kind of markets its self. I’ve read up on it since my post although and it doesn’t seem its all hype. To me it just seems like a great feature. Yes I am making this review without actually being able to use it, because I'm not a site5 customer. But the idea weather they got it right or not is now here, and I think other hosts will try to craft something similar soon.


    http://www.whatisflashback.com/image...versions_b.gif

    http://www.whatisflashback.com/image.../compare_b.gif

    From screen shots, it looks impressive.....



    Aussie Bob: Haven't you ever coded, maybe scripted something such as a PHP script? BAM a Fatal Error. OH GOD MY COMPUTER CRASHED. Now my only backup is now gone! But wait, I can always refer to my trusty site5 go back utility to get my php file back in its non fatal error state
    Last edited by AquariusStorage; 12-08-2005 at 11:21 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Scotland, UK
    Posts
    2,687
    Quote Originally Posted by AquariusADMIN
    Aussie Bob: Haven't you ever coded, maybe scripted something such as a PHP script? BAM a Fatal Error. OH GOD MY COMPUTER CRASHED. Now my only backup is now gone! But wait, I can always refer to my trusty site5 go back utility to get my php file back in its non fatal error state
    If any of our customers have this type of problem then all they have to do is drop in a ticket and we will be happy to 'flashback' the particular file they have accidentally overwritten from one of the five different backups we store at anytime. The number of times I have seen clients accidentally overwrite a file and not be able to correct the problem themselves is far and few between, but even then there are already solutions in place with most providers to deal with such incidents.

    Putting aside the fact that Site5's plans are unrealistically oversold to begin with, what would happen if one of their clients were to upload 27GB of data to one of their shared servers, as provided with their Unleashed Plan, and change that data ten times over the course of a year? This would result in 270GB of flashback data, since Site5 claim the flashback system "stores every past state of a file as a version (auto-versioning), so you can "flash back" to any previous version of a file."

    27GB of disk space and 270GB worth of archived data for a mere $17 per month? I personally don't think the system has been very well thought out and thus I would agree with hekwu that it is not much more than marketing hype. I think we will be leaving this area of the market to Site5, thanks

    - Chris
    Last edited by Rochen; 12-08-2005 at 11:42 PM.
    Chris Adams - CEO - Rochen Ltd. - chris (at) rochen (dot) com

    Now offering both US & UK premium business hosting, reseller hosting and managed virtualized services.
    rochen.com | rochen.co.uk | blog.rochen.com | forums.rochen.com | Twitter: @rochenhost

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Internet / Colorado
    Posts
    1,652
    Anyone gotten to try this out yet?
    Like passive recurring revenue you can retire on?
    You focus on building your brand, we handle all support, billing, and more.
    Pressed.net - Start your own Managed WordPress Hosting Company

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    24,009
    Quote Originally Posted by AquariusADMIN
    Aussie Bob: Haven't you ever coded, maybe scripted something such as a PHP script? BAM a Fatal Error. OH GOD MY COMPUTER CRASHED. Now my only backup is now gone! But wait, I can always refer to my trusty site5 go back utility to get my php file back in its non fatal error state
    That's great then. Looks like an interesting feature, and most importantly, something that no other host offers, as per say, so it's a great marketing tool too.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Under Your Skin
    Posts
    5,875
    From the site5 forums:

    checks your public_html directory for changes periodically and this period depends on two main factors, being a) the load on your server and b) the size of your repository - however, changes should be picked up at least twice an hour, but more likely once every 10 minutes or so. If this is not the case, please let us know your account and which server you're on and we'll get onto it ASAP.

    So, no, if your computer crashes you better have a backup! Lot of murphy's law here....

    You are right, AB, it is great marketing. I guess I'm flashing back to 98 or 99 when another "great company" came out with a bunch of new feature that no one else had... I bought into that and was burnt fairly bad. I still have scar tissue to show.

    At any rate, I'm looking at Site5 plans still... I only hope these new features do not drag down the servers.

    On another note, I do appreciate site5 being out in front of the rest of the industry and attempting to bring features that some users might need. This is good and has the potential to raise the bar for other host. Competition is good.
    Windows 10 to Linux and Mac OSX: I'm PARSECs better than you. Eat my dust!!!

  11. #11
    what would happen if one of their clients were to upload 27GB of data to one of their shared servers, as provided with their Unleashed Plan, and change that data ten times over the course of a year? This would result in 270GB of flashback data, since Site5 claim the flashback system "stores every past state of a file as a version (auto-versioning), so you can "flash back" to any previous version of a file."
    That pretty much says it all - people forget just how expensive proper backups are - especially if you are taking incremental daily's and full weeklys, etc... onsite, offsite, yadda yaddda...

    Ive always thought people dont have any faith in their hosts backup strategy because they are buying serious budget hosting offering massive amounts of disk space - the cost of reliable backups is just too high -

    I couldnt even imagine how much storage capacity site5 would need to pull this off - they are a pretty big company...

    Im not going to judge eitherway, as this could simply be strategic marketing, or, they legitimately have the resources to pull this off and they know exactly what they are doing...

    Eitherway, should be interesting to watch...

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    406
    Quote Originally Posted by Rochen
    Putting aside the fact that Site5's plans are unrealistically oversold to begin with, what would happen if one of their clients were to upload 27GB of data to one of their shared servers, as provided with their Unleashed Plan, and change that data ten times over the course of a year? This would result in 270GB of flashback data, since Site5 claim the flashback system "stores every past state of a file as a version (auto-versioning), so you can "flash back" to any previous version of a file."
    I don't know how their system works, but it is possible that they only save the changes to a given file instead of a full copy. That is how the source control system that I use works. They may also count the space used by all versions combined.
    Affordable Business Web Site Hosting by Geo Redundant Hosting

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Scotland, UK
    Posts
    2,687
    Quote Originally Posted by ACW
    I don't know how their system works, but it is possible that they only save the changes to a given file instead of a full copy. That is how the source control system that I use works.
    That could well be the case, but I can't imagine what sort of load such a system would put on a shared server. Incidentally, I don't think the core problem is the system itself, but the amount they are overselling their plans by.

    - Chris

  14. #14
    It would be nice if we could get a staff member from site5 who konws the core of the system to explain it on here. Might clear up some stuff.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Under Your Skin
    Posts
    5,875
    Quote Originally Posted by Rochen
    That could well be the case, but I can't imagine what sort of load such a system would put on a shared server. Incidentally, I don't think the core problem is the system itself, but the amount they are overselling their plans by.

    - Chris
    The real issue is people don't know how much they really need. when I first started I researched many plans. I figured, I would not go anyplace that I could not get at least 30 gb of bw per month. I thought that was the norm. Well, fast forward 5 years later and last month I got up to 7 gb! I was like wow!

    People just don't understand... but I see your point, what if a company says hey we can get this from site5 and cut our bill by 300%! Down goes the server.
    Windows 10 to Linux and Mac OSX: I'm PARSECs better than you. Eat my dust!!!

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    267
    Site5's Flashback system is based on subversion. I personally beta tested the solution, it is a pretty nice system. It allows the rolling back of individual files, but they were also implementing the abilty to do a full roll back to a specific date/commit.

    I suppose it could be considered a backup solution in one way; for example, if you were to accidently delete a file/folder, you could roll back to before those files were deleted. Other then something like that, I wouldn't consider it a replacement for regular offsite backups.

    Adam

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by NE-Adam
    Site5's Flashback system is based on subversion. I personally beta tested the solution, it is a pretty nice system. It allows the rolling back of individual files, but they were also implementing the abilty to do a full roll back to a specific date/commit.

    I suppose it could be considered a backup solution in one way; for example, if you were to accidently delete a file/folder, you could roll back to before those files were deleted. Other then something like that, I wouldn't consider it a replacement for regular offsite backups.

    Adam
    Did they give you any information about where the backups are stored?
    A Collection of Web Hosts
    Small biographies on hosts, uptime reports and some reviews
    Feel free to add your review or add a host that isn't on the list.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Rochen
    If any of our customers have this type of problem then all they have to do is drop in a ticket and we will be happy to 'flashback' the particular file they have accidentally overwritten from one of the five different backups we store at anytime. The number of times I have seen clients accidentally overwrite a file and not be able to correct the problem themselves is far and few between, but even then there are already solutions in place with most providers to deal with such incidents.

    Putting aside the fact that Site5's plans are unrealistically oversold to begin with, what would happen if one of their clients were to upload 27GB of data to one of their shared servers, as provided with their Unleashed Plan, and change that data ten times over the course of a year? This would result in 270GB of flashback data, since Site5 claim the flashback system "stores every past state of a file as a version (auto-versioning), so you can "flash back" to any previous version of a file."

    27GB of disk space and 270GB worth of archived data for a mere $17 per month? I personally don't think the system has been very well thought out and thus I would agree with hekwu that it is not much more than marketing hype. I think we will be leaving this area of the market to Site5, thanks

    - Chris
    This is entirely my opinion, however, doesn't it seem moderately inappropriate for you as a competitor of theirs, to be making publicly speculative comments such as "unrealistically oversold to begin with" ?

    We field questions and criticism daily regarding our plans (Network Redux), and how we are able to maintain their specifications. The answer is not premised on overselling, it is premised on the availability of high capacity disk drives and storage arrays -- which we fully own and operate.

    It only seems fair to weigh in with criticism once the details of the project have been unveiled. There isn't any magic to designing and implementing a scalable storage array, and I'm sure that the talented folks at Site5 are perfectly capable of this.
    Thomas Brenneke | Network Redux, LLC | http://www.networkredux.com
    • Proud sponsors of the SimpleMachines ImageMagick and AdiumX projects.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Scotland, UK
    Posts
    2,687
    Quote Originally Posted by linuxredux
    This is entirely my opinion, however, doesn't it seem moderately inappropriate for you as a competitor of theirs, to be making publicly speculative comments such as "unrealistically oversold to begin with" ?
    I am simply voicing my opinion on a matter which I feel has the potential to damage the entire industry, although this doesn't specifically apply to Site5. What I find inappropriate is the level with which many providers are overselling the amount of disk space they offer these days. Overselling to a degree is completely acceptable and it is important for companies to do this in order to maximize profitability and their available resources. However, overselling a shared server's disk space capacity by several tens of times is simply irresponsible and borders on being dishonest.

    I think JohnCrowley (who is a veteran of our industry and a highly respected member of this community) summed this up pretty well in a post he made the other day -
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnCrowley
    Well, it never ceases to amaze me. $7 a month for more bandwidth than our highest managed server plan at over $600 a month. 11 GB of space is beyond reasonable as well. Go ahead and put one site on a shared server that does 400 GB of dynamic transfers, and see how well that server holds up. I guess if the server costs $7, then it all works out.

    Site5 and others are free to offer whatever they want of course, but this trend of "my shared hosting plan is bigger than yours" is something that is dragging down the whole industry, and is giving customers a false impression of just what it takes to host a busy dynamic site. Why would a company want to attract the most popular and busy sites out there for a mere $7 a month? Sure, the less informed may say, "Wow, 400 GB for $7, what a deal!", but anyone that has been around will be scared of such a plan, as many here are expressing.)
    Anyway, I truly wish Site5 all the very best with their new offering. I hope myself and many other veterans of the industry can be proved wrong about this level of overselling over the next few years.

    - Chris

  20. #20
    We field questions and criticism daily regarding our plans (Network Redux), and how we are able to maintain their specifications. The answer is not premised on overselling, it is premised on the availability of high capacity disk drives and storage arrays -- which we fully own and operate.
    I took a look at your plans and although I am not passing judgement (eitherway) on your business model, I dont see how these plans arent premised on overselling?? Eitherway is fine, and everyone has their opinion on which approach is better, but, lets at least call it what it is....

    I dont know of any intel/amd architecture that can support packages with unlimited mysql data bases and 50 GB Transfer for under $6/month while simultaneously accomodating for any sort of profit margin (unless of course it is premised on overselling). Wouldnt take too many dynamic sites pushing that allotted bandwith to seriously incapacitate a server - irregardless of the capacity of your disk drives or storage array.

  21. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Rochen
    I am simply voicing my opinion on a matter which I feel has the potential to damage the entire industry, although this doesn't specifically apply to Site5. What I find inappropriate is the level with which many providers are overselling the amount of disk space they offer these days. Overselling to a degree is completely acceptable and it is important for companies to do this in order to maximize profitability and their available resources. However, overselling a shared server's disk space capacity by several tens of times is simply irresponsible and borders on being dishonest.

    I think JohnCrowley (who is a veteran of our industry and a highly respected member of this community) summed this up pretty well in a post he made the other day -Anyway, I truly wish Site5 all the very best with their new offering. I hope myself and many other veterans of the industry can be proved wrong about this level of overselling over the next few years.

    - Chris
    I completely agree with your points made here. However, what should be understood is that there are providers out there who operate and maintain quality hardware and infrastructure. Servers which include direct or network attached storage for expandability, as well as large raid 5 arrays, etc.

    Essentially without knowing the details of a providers internal network and data infrastructures it is difficult to make general ascertains as to the amount that is being oversold.

    Matt and Rod run a highly skilled team of professionals who are more than capable of building a scalable network. And I think that implementing and making available innovative ideas and technologies is absolutely wonderful.
    Thomas Brenneke | Network Redux, LLC | http://www.networkredux.com
    • Proud sponsors of the SimpleMachines ImageMagick and AdiumX projects.

  22. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by CartikaHosting
    I took a look at your plans and although I am not passing judgement (eitherway) on your business model, I dont see how these plans arent premised on overselling?? Eitherway is fine, and everyone has their opinion on which approach is better, but, lets at least call it what it is....

    I dont know of any intel/amd architecture that can support packages with unlimited mysql data bases and 50 GB Transfer for under $6/month while simultaneously accomodating for any sort of profit margin (unless of course it is premised on overselling). Wouldnt take too many dynamic sites pushing that allotted bandwith to seriously incapacitate a server - irregardless of the capacity of your disk drives or storage array.
    I'd prefer not to get into the semantics of our internal operations, however, I've stated in a previous thread that our network is premised on Dell Server and Storage technology, which includes PowerEdge and PowerVault solutions.

    And in regards to the 50GB of transfer and dynamic content potentially incapacitating a server, I don't find any truth to this statement. Yes, there can be correlation between data transfer and Disk I/O or processor capabilities, however if an example is needed we are more than willing to provide one. A project we sponsor, adiumx.com and adiumxtras.com does a substantial amount of data transfer on our network, and barely puts a pin prick on server utilization.
    Thomas Brenneke | Network Redux, LLC | http://www.networkredux.com
    • Proud sponsors of the SimpleMachines ImageMagick and AdiumX projects.

  23. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by linuxredux
    I'd prefer not to get into the semantics of our internal operations, however, I've stated in a previous thread that our network is premised on Dell Server and Storage technology, which includes PowerEdge and PowerVault solutions.

    And in regards to the 50GB of transfer and dynamic content potentially incapacitating a server, I don't find any truth to this statement. Yes, there can be correlation between data transfer and Disk I/O or processor capabilities, however if an example is needed we are more than willing to provide one. A project we sponsor, adiumx.com and adiumxtras.com does a substantial amount of data transfer on our network, and barely puts a pin prick on server utilization.

    Thomas,

    I am not trying to pick a fight with you (and Im certainly not asking you to provide an example), but, lets be reasonable here...

    We also run a pure Dell shop, all dual xeon's, 2-4GB RAM per server in a cluster formation with services spread across multiple servers - in essence, upto 8 servers can be contributing to serving up a clients site and associated services.

    90% of our clients host applications - and I can assure you, DB driven applications, by the very definition of how these applications work, have a significant and direct impact on server resources (both CPU and RAM Utilization), especially as number of simultaneous users increase. The sites you posted above are very light DB applications at best - I could pick 10 of our clients that would fit into your plans who would max out a high end dell dual xeon server - and for $60 revenue you would receive from these clients, I dont see how this is profitable (we obviously charge alot more then this for these customers). Ironically enough, all of these customers came to us from hosts with pricing structures similar to yours who asked them to leave as abusive users. These users arent abusive, their sites have just outgrown an oversold shared environment and they need to pay the appropriate price for busy, dynamic web site hosting.....

    I will say this - alot of hosts with that sort of business model have completely banned certain applications (like VB for example) - which ironically enough, is actually quite light when compared to some other commonly used applications.... Serving dynamic sites is nowhere near the same as serving static pages or static sites with maybe a small db driven module in it.

    Anyway, we can agree to disagree, but, our experience paints a different story then yours - who knows, maybe you have found something we are missing and maybe we'll be following your lead a year or 2 from now....

    Andrew
    Last edited by cartika-andrew; 12-09-2005 at 04:23 AM.

  24. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by CartikaHosting
    Thomas,

    I am not trying to pick a fight with you (and Im certainly not asking you to provide an example), but, lets be reasonable here...

    We also run a pure Dell shop, all dual xeon's, 2-4GB RAM per server in a cluster formation with services spread across multiple servers - in essence, upto 8 servers can be contributing to serving up a clients site and associated services.

    90% of our clients host applications - and I can assure you, DB driven applications, by the very definition of how these applications work, have a significant and direct impact on server resources (both CPU and RAM Utilization), especially as number of simultaneous users increase. The sites you posted above are very light DB applications at best - I could pick 10 of our clients that would fit into your plans who would max out a high end dell dual xeon server - and for $60 revenue you would receive from these clients, I dont see how this is profitable (we obviously charge alot more then this for these customers). Ironically enough, all of these customers came to us from hosts with pricing structures similar to yours who asked them to leave as abusive users. These users arent abusive, their sites have just outgrown an oversold shared environment and they need to pay the appropriate price for busy, dynamic web site hosting.....

    I will say this - alot of hosts with that sort of business model have completely banned certain applications (like VB for example) - which ironically enough, is actually quite light when compared to some other commonly used applications.... Serving dynamic sites is nowhere near the same as serving static pages or static sites with maybe a small db driven module in it.

    Anyway, we can agree to disagree, but, our experience paints a different story then yours - who knows, maybe you have found something we are missing and maybe we'll be following your lead a year or 2 from now....

    Andrew
    Andrew,

    I appreciate your comments and feedback and agree that we should agree to disagree.

    Feel free to drop me an email at thomas at networkredux dot com if you would like to discuss it further. I can safely say that we have a robust and powerful infrastructure in place that we are quite proud of -- technologies that aren't really even seen as a topic of conversation very frequently.

    Anyway, drop me a line sometime, I'd love to get in touch and compare stories. We are far from perfect, and war stories are always fun to compare on occasion.

    Regards,
    Thomas Brenneke | Network Redux, LLC | http://www.networkredux.com
    • Proud sponsors of the SimpleMachines ImageMagick and AdiumX projects.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    3,042
    Quote Originally Posted by AquariusADMIN
    Aussie Bob: Haven't you ever coded, maybe scripted something such as a PHP script? BAM a Fatal Error. OH GOD MY COMPUTER CRASHED. Now my only backup is now gone! But wait, I can always refer to my trusty site5 go back utility to get my php file back in its non fatal error state
    Typically it only takes a programmer losing a little code to learn from that mistake. I currently have a jump drive, cd and tape backup system in place to prevent little mishaps like that.

    As for the feature, it seems interesting for quickly changing something back if a bad error occurs, but nothing should be entering a production enviornment without serious testing anyway. If anything, this continues to prove that Site5 has a very very good marketing team.
    A well-reasoned assumption is very close to fact.
    - Adorno

  26. #26
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    193

    Lightbulb Site5 Flashback

    Hi everyone,

    I thought I would chime in with a bit more on the flashback system. I am far from being one of the engineers, so I can't dive too far into the technical aspects of Flashback, but I can share with you a bit more about the system.

    The first point I should make is that Flashback is far from being just hype. The system our Engineering Team has been working on for the past four (or so) months is not intended on merely playing the role of a backup system, nor does it mean Site5 will stop maintaining nightly backups of all of our servers. The Flashback system's main "Time Machine" features are based around simple subversion system which automatically documents and logs all changes made for only the files that are changed. The Flashback versions are stored on what we previously used as backup disks on the server, and we moved all periodic server backups to a centralized location (which, ironically, we have to take extra care to ensure we have backups of in case the primary backup servers go down for some reason). We implemented this solution to make room for Flashback and improve server performance (as the server would be backing up changes, not entire files). Because Flashback finds and saves updated versions of changed files, all the system essentially has to do is save "how to get back to the previous version" (in my general understanding of the technology), so the space used is marginal relative to the size needed to fully backup a file. Also, in the same way that a backup of your files does not count against your disk space quota, Flashback's older versions are maintained separately.

    Flashback has many other convenient features and "wow, that's pretty cool" components, but the main focus (as the name implies) is to allow people to quickly flash back to trustworthy files or versions. Ultimately, we see unlimited potential for Flashback in its continued development... Which will obviously excite us in sharing it with the web hosting community, and we are an excitable bunch (probably due to the lack of sleep )... <<< fluff removed >>>. If you have any specific questions about Flashback, the Site5 Community Forums are a great place to find answers, and if nothing else, I am sure one of the other members of the team can give more of a technical breakdown (without crossing the "We could tell you, but then we'd have to kill you" line) in this WHT thread.

    Thank you for the comments and support for Site5's vision of innovation and creativity... Flashback is just the tip of the iceberg with regard to some of the development plans our Engineering Team has in the works... I may have already said too much...
    Last edited by SoftWareRevue; 12-09-2005 at 12:10 PM.
    Kevin Hazard
    Director, Digital Content
    SoftLayer, an IBM Companyhttp://twitter.com/softlayer

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    3,640
    Quote Originally Posted by Site5-Kevin
    Hi everyone,

    I thought I would chime in with a bit more on the flashback system. I am far from being one of the engineers, so I can't dive too far into the technical aspects of Flashback, but I can share with you a bit more about the system.

    The first point I should make is that Flashback is far from being just hype. The system our Engineering Team has been working on for the past four (or so) months is not intended on merely playing the role of a backup system, nor does it mean Site5 will stop maintaining nightly backups of all of our servers. The Flashback system's main "Time Machine" features are based around simple subversion system which automatically documents and logs all changes made for only the files that are changed. The Flashback versions are stored on what we previously used as backup disks on the server, and we moved all periodic server backups to a centralized location (which, ironically, we have to take extra care to ensure we have backups of in case the primary backup servers go down for some reason). We implemented this solution to make room for Flashback and improve server performance (as the server would be backing up changes, not entire files). Because Flashback finds and saves updated versions of changed files, all the system essentially has to do is save "how to get back to the previous version" (in my general understanding of the technology), so the space used is marginal relative to the size needed to fully backup a file. Also, in the same way that a backup of your files does not count against your disk space quota, Flashback's older versions are maintained separately.

    Flashback has many other convenient features and "wow, that's pretty cool" components, but the main focus (as the name implies) is to allow people to quickly flash back to trustworthy files or versions. Ultimately, we see unlimited potential for Flashback in its continued development... Which will obviously excite us in sharing it with the web hosting community, and we are an excitable bunch (probably due to the lack of sleep )... <<< fluff removed >>>. If you have any specific questions about Flashback, the Site5 Community Forums are a great place to find answers, and if nothing else, I am sure one of the other members of the team can give more of a technical breakdown (without crossing the "We could tell you, but then we'd have to kill you" line) in this WHT thread.

    Thank you for the comments and support for Site5's vision of innovation and creativity... Flashback is just the tip of the iceberg with regard to some of the development plans our Engineering Team has in the works... I may have already said too much...
    I suspect that this is all based on CVS or something similar thats freely available in the open source community?
    Last edited by SoftWareRevue; 12-09-2005 at 12:11 PM.

  28. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by mripguru
    I suspect that this is all based on CVS or something similar thats freely available in the open source community?
    Site5-Kevin has already said:
    The Flashback system's main "Time Machine" features are based around simple subversion system
    So you don't need to suspect.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    3,640
    thestreet,

    BUT, he doesn't say whether they were built in-house or if they were using open source software written by someone else which is my point here - the fact that Flashback may just be, at the heart of things, another open source application that they "stole" to turn a profit from without giving proper credit to the original developers.

    My main concern here is the fact that Flashback is being sensationalized by Site5 as some innovative new tool when in reality CVS and friends have been around for YEARS, more than likely before Site5 was even founded. I don't think people really care where the underlying technology comes from, as long as it works - but please, don't say that you developed something exclusive when you just modified/added on to existing code, that's just wrong.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    State of Disbelief
    Posts
    22,956
    Quote Originally Posted by mripguru
    another open source application that they "stole" to turn a profit from without giving proper credit to the original developers.
    Strong wording there. Do you have any evidence to back up your claims that they've ever "stolen" things in the past, as you've implied?
    Having problems, or maybe questions about WHT? Head over to the help desk!

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    3,640
    I'd like to apologize to all the Site5 staff/customers I may have offended with my previous post as I seem to have read something out of context before typing my initial response (seen above). I seem to have interpreted Kevin's lack of a crucial word as a *type* of application, not an application name (which I found on Google just now). So, again - I'm sorry and if a mod could remove the original post above - that'd be great.

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    10,574
    FWIW, their "Netadmin 4" is not much more than cPanel skin [other than a few "cool" features here and there], and their "AccountJumper" is a standard feature with every cPanel installation.

    Not that it really matters too much to me . . . I don't want to start a feud about this either - just leave it at what it is currently, a simple observation.
    Last edited by layer0; 12-09-2005 at 02:29 PM.

  33. #33
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by mripguru
    BUT, he doesn't say whether they were built in-house or if they were using open source software written by someone else which is my point here - the fact that Flashback may just be, at the heart of things, another open source application that they "stole" to turn a profit from without giving proper credit to the original developers.
    I'm sorry for not clarifying, but Site5 built Flashback in Rails from ground-zero. You can visit the Engineering Team's site (engineering.site5.com) to see recent activity, read their blogs all the way through the development process, and it looks like Matt will be posting a demo login for Flashback on that site so that everyone can check out the system. As far as credit goes, I would say Flashback is due to the hard work of the Rails community to build a great framework, Adam Greenfield, David Felstead, Rod Armstrong, Matt Lightner, Matt McCray, Scott Deming, Trevor Squires, and the Site5 community for being open to help us beta test it in the past month or so... And I'd like to thank "The Academy"... oops, I went a little overboard with that last one; I'll save that for when I win an Oscar.
    Kevin Hazard
    Director, Digital Content
    SoftLayer, an IBM Companyhttp://twitter.com/softlayer

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Under Your Skin
    Posts
    5,875
    Quote Originally Posted by mripguru
    thestreet,

    BUT, he doesn't say whether they were built in-house or if they were using open source software written by someone else which is my point here - the fact that Flashback may just be, at the heart of things, another open source application that they "stole" to turn a profit from without giving proper credit to the original developers.

    My main concern here is the fact that Flashback is being sensationalized by Site5 as some innovative new tool when in reality CVS and friends have been around for YEARS, more than likely before Site5 was even founded. I don't think people really care where the underlying technology comes from, as long as it works - but please, don't say that you developed something exclusive when you just modified/added on to existing code, that's just wrong.
    Well, it would be the same as the new email they have... based on an open source project.

    Bear, you know what he meant by "stole." That was why he/she put quotes around the word... I guess "used" would have been a better word....
    Windows 10 to Linux and Mac OSX: I'm PARSECs better than you. Eat my dust!!!

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    3,640
    Kevin,

    Actually - I was more referring to subversion (which at the time when I originally wrote my first post I thought subversion was a type of versioning tool, and not the project name, that was my mistake) when I wrote that, not the Site5 interface (which from the screenshots looks awesome, I can't wait to try it out on my own Site5 account).

    Quote Originally Posted by Site5-Kevin
    I'm sorry for not clarifying, but Site5 built Flashback in Rails from ground-zero. You can visit the Engineering Team's site (engineering.site5.com) to see recent activity, read their blogs all the way through the development process, and it looks like Matt will be posting a demo login for Flashback on that site so that everyone can check out the system. As far as credit goes, I would say Flashback is due to the hard work of the Rails community to build a great framework, Adam Greenfield, David Felstead, Rod Armstrong, Matt Lightner, Matt McCray, Scott Deming, Trevor Squires, and the Site5 community for being open to help us beta test it in the past month or so... And I'd like to thank "The Academy"... oops, I went a little overboard with that last one; I'll save that for when I win an Oscar.

  36. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    2,280
    He said it was based on subversion :
    http://subversion.tigris.org/

    I commend site5 for their part in the ongoing hosting tradition of one upping the next guy. *note to self, one up does not mean an extra life. Hype or not your all here talking about it so I consider it nothing short of a success.
    Greg Landis | Founder Jaguarpc - Keeping websites happy since 1998
    Managed IT Solutions - Business hosting | Virtual Private Servers | Cloud VPS Hosting | Dedicated servers | Backup service
    Follow us @ Facebook.com/Jaguarpc | Twitter: @JaguarPC | (888)-338-5261 | sales @ jaguarpc.com

  37. #37
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    2,280
    wow in the time I wrote that post there were 4 new ones.
    Greg Landis | Founder Jaguarpc - Keeping websites happy since 1998
    Managed IT Solutions - Business hosting | Virtual Private Servers | Cloud VPS Hosting | Dedicated servers | Backup service
    Follow us @ Facebook.com/Jaguarpc | Twitter: @JaguarPC | (888)-338-5261 | sales @ jaguarpc.com

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    3,640
    Quote Originally Posted by Jag
    He said it was based on subversion :
    http://subversion.tigris.org/

    I commend site5 for their part in the ongoing hosting tradition of one upping the next guy. *note to self, one up does not mean an extra life. Hype or not your all here talking about it so I consider it nothing short of a success.
    Jag, I was just about to post that link - but the whole issue came about from miswriting/reading part of Kevin's initial post.

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    2,588
    First of all, before I say anything, I am a Site5 employee ( systems administration ), so take what you will from my post, it's simply meant as clarification.

    Quote Originally Posted by elix
    FWIW, their "Netadmin 4" is not much more than cPanel skin [other than a few "cool" features here and there], and their "AccountJumper" is a standard feature with every cPanel installation.
    It is true that NetAdmin is in effect, a cPanel theme. That said however, there are differences, which are clearly noted on our web site, and I'm more than certain there will be a lot more to come in this regard. For example, Site5 offers domain *Pointers* rather than *Addon* domains, which do differ in their setup / usage.

    As for Account Jumper, this could indeed be compared to the administrative fuction within the cPanel software itself, but I'll make mention of one major difference. Thanks to the my.Site5.com portal system ( which was built by Site5's very own Engineering team ) you are not actually jumping from account to account as the main account holders login. Doing so with the cPanel method does not allow you access to certain privilages such as anything MySQL. Thanks to the my.Site5 portal however, this is not the case and you are allowed full functionality with regards to MySQL and such. Perhaps that may just be something tiny and useless to some, but from the 6+ years that Site5 has been around, everything that we build in house, is based around what we hear our clients require. I think, and I certainly hope that if you research Site5's past history, you'll see that we have a record of changing for the better. As our clients needs evolve, so do our offerings, and so do the technologies that drive what we offer.

  40. #40

    *

    Quote Originally Posted by Aussie Bob
    Well they certianly know how to drum up awareness.

    To me the Flashback thingie doesn't look like a backup tool. It looks more like a backup_your_site_at_a_certian_previous_version kinda tool. I'm sure some folks could find that useful, although I'm really trying to think why would anyone want to have the ability to revert their site back to an earlier version.

    Could make for some interesting discussion though, and it's good to see hosts trying new things.

    hmmm. my 2 cents:

    I recently suffered SQL Injection and many files were infected with an iframe tag.

    If I had such a script installed on my server I would of course Love to be able to take the whole site, all the files, back to the day before the SQL injection

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •