1 website bs packages: Page 3 - Enhance Control Panel

1 website bs packages

cPFence

While we don’t face issues with resources being allocated per website in our business, I completely understand the need for per-package resource allocation for other businesses. Your concerns are entirely valid.

Unfortunately, this is quite complex with Enhance’s current system architecture. The entire design revolves around one Linux user, one website, and one container , each container with its own dedicated resources.

You can run the following command to see how this works in practice:

systemd-cgtop

I’m not saying it’s impossible, but implementing per-package resource allocation would be extremely complicated and likely require a significant rewrite of many core functions and modules.

So, don’t be too surprised if this feature request doesn’t make it to production, especially given how challenging the v12 release has already been for the Enhance team.

adil

cPFence
Now this is a response, Thanks 👍️

mike

cPFence honestly i am like you I don’t have high hopes for this being implemented but maybe … maybe with v12 some core packages are rewritten in a way that will make it possible. I honestly have no clue. But it’s definitely an annoyance for so many ppl here.

signo

cPFence I assume the resources are assigned per docker container (website), that would be the reason not to assign the resources per package. Am I right? If that is the case, then when V12 arrives it would lift the primary restriction not to have resources assigned per package, of course, it would need to be developed, but it would be possible.

cPFence

signo

Nope, websites currently run in native containers (Namespaces, Cgroups, which is a good thing, by the way), and this will remain the same in v12 with no changes. So, the complications of assigning resources per package will still apply in v12 as well.

hshah

cPFence

You are quite knowledgable in Enhance architecture, can these things be possible as a multi-domain hosting solution inside the website for mass hosting providers under the current architecture?

Single app to app clone for staging purposes
Single app restore from backups instead of full site backup
Allowing every app to use a different PHP version?

Third may not be possible i believe. But the top two are needed badly either as a part of enhance or a third party solution to make enhance a viable choice for small hosting providers.

cPFence

hshah You are quite knowledgable in Enhance architecture

Not really , We just had to dive in deeply while developing our software. Any experienced admin in this community could know just as much, if not more, if they did the same or went even further.

hshah Single app restore from backups instead of full site backup
Allowing every app to use a different PHP version?

To my knowledge, those two features should become much easier to implement once v12 is released, and I’m confident they will be added sooner or later. These are very popular and highly requested functionalities.

The main services running in Docker have been quite limiting, not just for Enhance itself but also for those of us developing software to run on Enhance servers. We’ve had great features planned but had to delay them because Docker posed an obstacle. The Enhance team’s decision to move away from Docker is a necessary step, and I’m glad they’re tackling it now. Waiting any longer would have made the transition even more complex or, in some cases, impossible.

mike

cPFence browsing here between the threads adam said that it could be done "limits per subscription". since we did not get a comment from adam then "no high hopes" or at least in the near future.

hshah

cPFence

Thanks for the feedback.

In the meantime, what maybe the best way to manage WordPress per app backups.

Are there any plugins that can take incremental backups to store in Cloudflare or Amazon storage?

Kind regards,

cPFence

mike

I didn’t see that comment, but if Adam mentioned it, then he might have an idea to implement it without needing to refactor the main structure. Enhance is his creation, and he knows it better than anyone else. Let’s wait and see.

twest

hshah this week I tested a few backups plugins for incremental.

On my list of potentials was Updraft Plus, WP Time Capsule, and WPVivid.

I tried Vivid first because it had cheap price and includes extra plugins and staging site functionality. Unfortunately the backups are not good. Firstly, it zips the backups which is extremely resource intensive (during backup runs it will peg 1 cpu at 100%). Next, and worstly, it does not have true incremental. At most you can run a fresh FULL backup every month and then get 30 days of "incremental", then it repeats with another full backup followed by 30 days of incremental again. Not good.

I skipped Updraft after reading the docs, it appears they have the same style incremental as Vivid, using the heavy resource consuming zips. I assume Updraft would at LEAST have better scheduling available - like maybe 1 full backup and then a year of incremental? I don't know if it does, but I would hope.

The latest one I tested is Time Capsule. It has true incrementals - only making 1 full run backup and then adding new files to it during incremental runs. It has restore points capability to allow for restoring as far back as 365 days if you so choose. The initial backup run doesn't zip, it streams each individual file to the storage, EXTREMELY LOW RESOURCE USE, I couldn't actually even see a difference in cpu usage during the initial run, amazing. I would note that backing up to BackBlaze was ridiculous slow (1.5 hours per GB), while transferring to Wasabi was super fast (20 minutes per GB).

The only downside to these incrementals is that it's Object Storage, so you can't easily zip a folder of files to download if needed. Backblaze has a "snapshot" feature to help with this, where they will zip files/folders you choose in a bucket and then you can download that snapshot as a zip (download to your comp, then upload to server - no way to download straight to server), but sheesh the transfer rate is soooo slow.

I will prolly stick with Wasabi + Time Capsule for now. Still testing out the full functionality, and I need to test restoration. At least it's really low resource use, that's one of the biggest concerns, and having truly incremental runs... Just wish there was more user friendly storage options.

cPFence

hshah

For incremental backups, I’d recommend looking into the options suggested by @twest, as it seems he has already done extensive testing.

For our setup, we use the bulk WordPress backup tool included in cPFence to automate weekly backups of files and databases, which are then transferred to a backup server automatically. This approach is ideal for clients who request per-app restores, while we rely on daily Enhance incremental backups for full account restores.

hshah

twest

cPFence

Thanks for your feedback twest & cpfence.

Kind regards,

« Previous Page