Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet

Open Source or Commercial WWWBoard Software? 42

Posted by Cliff from the which-one-would-you-use? dept.
BluSkreen asks: "I've got a site that runs Matt's WWWBoard, with most of the available mods added, the counter file lock sub routine, and most of the other hacks various people have done. The site regularly serves 60,000 plus requests a day, sometimes more. There are generally 100 or so posts a day. The last two months we have served about a million pages a month." The gist of it is that he's now having problems and looking for alternatives. Click below for more.

"Aside from the security concerns of the script, we are having problems with the script supporting that many users (up to 30 to 50 concurent, during peak times). During peak times, we can get 3 to 6 requests a second, which is fine for veiwing static pages with our configuration, but when multiple people try to post, the script can't support it. It sits on a T-1 all by itself on a Cobalt RAQ2, with 256 MB RAM. I like the "slash" package, but I've not been able to make it run on the RAQ2 just yet.

I'd like to "Ask Slashdot", what software/ hardware combination would you recommend? Is there a way to modify Slash so that the main articles are generated by the users, instead of submitted by the moderators? And lastly, has anyone been able to get Slash to run on a Cobalt box."

Anyone have other alternatives for WWWBoard software? I'm sure there are plenty out there, but how well do these packages work (especially under heavy loads)?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Open Source or Commercial WWWBoard Software? More

Open Source or Commercial WWWBoard Software?

Comments Filter:

  • A set of Perl scripts, formerly GPL (3.5.1 was the last GPL version AFAIK) but now commercial. You can find the GPL version out and about. For your traffic, you might want to pay and get some support though. Either way, it's pretty slick.

    www.wwwthreads.org [wwwthreads.org]

  • I'm on the O'Reilly WebBoard team. I wrote the NNTP component. Glad to hear you found it scalable. Personally I don't know much about the web interface, having joined only to do the NNTP component, but it looks like a good product.

    However there are a couple of things to consider:

    1. The web interface is single threaded. This hasn't affected the performance for most people, but it is an issue (one that is being thought about for the next release).

    2. It uses 3 horrible components (not my choice): VB for WebBoard web interface, MS SQL server (5 user edition) - bad because it means I can't properly cache statements and do some nice things I'd like to, and finally - NT. However I developed the NNTP component on Linux so there's no reason you can't run that separately on a Linux box.

    However I would very much like to hear back from anyone using WebBoard (as would the rest of the team - we're a very small group), especially feedback on the NNTP component.

    Matt.
  • A lot of people like something that just works out of the box and doesn't give them a lot of trouble. Obviously that wasn't the case with the free solution that the original poster was trying, although I can't speak for all free systems.

    It's the same reason some people still pay for O'Reilly's WebSite Pro - unlike IIS (and other free NT web servers) it just plain works.
  • I did buy a copy of Web Board earlier this year. The performance on a dual PII 233 with 512MB RAM (Dell Poweredge 2200) was horrible. There was a nasty issue where Web Board virtually locked up one of the processors. There were also other issues relating to performance.

    OK. I don't know if that was Web Board 3, but it probably was since 4 is very recent. One of the major reasons for WB4 was performance improvement and ability to do load distribution across multiple servers. However it's sadly still NT and still VB and still single threaded - I don't have a control over those issues.

    Support at the ORA site was anything but but helpful, denying any problems, until some other posts meticulously detailed the issue. Then there was no comment. It's a classic case for Open Source, as there were several on the forum with the chops to take a look and fix what was wrong, but the nature of closed software prohibited such.

    I can't argue with this. It is unfortunately the nature of closed s/w. I wish I were in a position to change it. However I'd still like to be paid for the work :)

    I'm probably not the only one with whom the irony is not lost on the fact the Tim O'Reilly, while lately pushing OSS models, still has Web
    Board under an commercial license, for a single platform.

    I see the irony there too. It's not just WB either - ORA have WebSite Pro too. One of the key things I had to keep fighting was support for the NNTP server on "alternative" platforms too - it's developed on Linux - I don't have a single NT box. It's also developed on a Sybase backend rather than the stinky MSDE they deliver on. But hey - maybe they'll see the error of their ways soon enough :) (I'm trying, OK :))

    The real problem now, is how to deal with the nearly 30,000 messages in the archive since January.

    If you decide to try out the latest WB, contact me directly (matt @ sergeant.org - minus the spaces) 'cos we're working on a WWWBoard->WebBoard conversion script (there are a number of people in your shoes).

    Good Luck with your search.

  • Thoughts (Score:2)

    by jd ( 1658 )
    There is a general rule for this kind of work that more memory works better than a faster processer, so for user overload, the first thing I'd look at is whether there is sufficient memory to handle the number of users.

    Secondly, Slash should serve well as a BBS program. Actually, why would you want the main topics to be entered by the user? If you treat each "topic" as being a section on the board, and the "comments" area as the actual BBS itself, it is much more natural, the way it is.

    Thirdly, Squishdot is starting to shape up nicely. That might be worth a squint.

    Lastly, optimise EVERYTHING as best you can. There is no point in upgrading the software and/or hardware, if you end up running only just about as well as you did to start with. Free up as much RAM as you physically can, and squash any compiled code into as small a space as you can, whilst keeping the speed optimisation as high as possible.

  • Squishdot.org
  • For help on Slash, check out the Slash-Help mailing list at this address [asu.edu]. Allowing anyone to post a toplevel story shouldn't be too difficult a modification to make - just move some code out of admin.pl.

    Oh, and you might have better work with Slash 0.3-3.7 [zevils.com] than the stock versions that Rob puts out. Those versions are quite buggy. Oh, btw, there's also NNTP support [zevils.com] for Slash.

    I'm the one who put out newsd and the 0.3-3.7 tarball. I also seem to be making the most noise about adding functionality to Slash on slash-help. In fact, someone just offered to host a Slash CVS repository for me and I'm forking the code (see slash-help - especially the recent YA0.4W thread - for the gory details of why.)

    (I've sent a copy of this reply to the original poster via email since I don't know if he's still reading this story or not.)

  • You need to get and install Zope [zope.org] first then add
    Squishdot [zope.org] as a module. Works grand and straight out of the box but you need to decide you need Zope first as this is a strategy level thing really.



  • I know that you actually meant www.phorum.org
    --
    Notepad specialist & FAT administrator, group training available Fabian Rodriguez
  • I would not be one to ignore the wishes of the users, but my experience has been that the essentially linear organizational model used by Web Crossing (and the Well, and Motet, and the Citadel BBSes) generally leads to more intelligent sustained conversation than organizational models that encourage branching.

    Threaded systems -- and Slashdot is one -- are good for post-and-response environments. You can see how that shapes the conversation here. It's great for Q&A, far superior to linear or room-based conversations, but interactions tend to burn out fairly quickly.

    So I think a decision on Web-based conferencing software turns on your goals. If you're trying to build a very tight community where the users really get to know one another, the linear model is superior. If you're putting the Pet Vet online for questions and answers, a threaded model works better.

    The best compromise I've seen was the proprietary Interchange system, developed by Ziff-Davis in 1993-1995. Its discussion model was fundamentally linear but allowed for easy branching, either at the decision of a participant or through action by a sysop. That helped to sustain a focused conversation while accommodating the reality of topic drift and tangental responses.

    Whatever you do, demand that your software keep track of what the user has already seen. It's sad that so many "commercial" packages these days can't match the basic functionality that Fido bulletin boards provided back in the dark ages.
  • has anyone else been able to contact squishdot?

    I can't seem to get a response at all.....

  • eThreads (Score:1)

    by e ( 12832 )
    eThreads is GPL'ed forum software written in Perl. It uses a SQL database to store all forum and post information (which allows the scripts to be run on multiple servers using a shared SQL backend... great for redundancy and load balancing). It supports multiple forums (and forum trees for easy browsing), and each forum can be completely customized (HTML templates for each forum are stored in the db and then post values are parsed in at view time).

    I realize I'm a little biased (I did write the thing, after all), but I've found eThreads a lot easier to use than anything else I've seen.

    http://ethreads.com [ethreads.com]

    e;
  • I went through the same process recently, looking at everything I could find to move from UBB. Whatever I tried came up short on performance or features except O'Reilly software's WebBoard [oreilly.com].

    I know this package is outside your existing platform, but I've found it reliable and extremely resilient under a heavy load (1000 posts with binary attachments per day). It's also ready to go out-of-the-box and scriptable. Customization is as easy as HTML.

    It comes with real-time paging, a variety of chat features, SMTP notification with listservs and .ZIP digests, and NNTP support. Administration is web-based and well implemented.

    Drawback is the cost: about $1000 for the software plus an NT box. You don't need to fool with IIS as it runs best with the included web server.
  • If you're looking for software, there's lists at these two places.

    The CGI Resources List [resourceindex.com] lists a whole slew of message board CGI scripts in perl.. some are free.. some aren't. Check it out

    TheSripts .com [thescripts.com] also has a very large index of free scripts.

    Another one that you really might want to look at is Web Crossing [webcrossing.com] It's not freeware, but it can handle a very large number of users and posts, and runs really well. See Builder Buzz [builder.com] to see it in use.
  • There are two very good php based message boards that work with a variety of databases.

    phorum and w-agora
    www.phorum.com [phorum.com]
    http://w-agora.araxe.fr/ [araxe.fr]
    because they are both database based, they hold up very well under heavy conditions.

    I prefer to use w-agora becuase it is extreamly easy to customize, supports multiple forums, and even multiple sites (for virtual servers).


    - daniel
  • squishdot? What the heck is squishdot? Where can
    I find this? I am currently working on revamping the slash code.. well basically using it as an example to write a web board for my site. I would
    love to see other peoples modifications. The more examples the better:)

    Thanks.. Malice95

  • Sporum! (Score:1)

    by dlc ( 41988 )

    There is a great set of Perl scripts called Sporum, available at http://www.smallpig.net/sporum/ [smallpig.net]. From the Sporum web site:

    Sporum is one of free web-based dicussion board software package available on the internet. What sets the Sporum apart from other online bulletin board systems is its unique interface, extensive administrative features, and easy installation procedure. You can read through the features here [smallpig.net] and check out our demo [smallpig.net] site to see the many ways which Sporum has been implemented.

    Sporum is at version 1.2b3 and is definitely worth the time to download and install it.

    darren

  • I was able to get a MIPS Cobalt distribution of Webcrossing, and it's pretty good, except for the lack of threading capability. One thing the users want more than anything, is to be able to view the messages in a threaded mode.

    Dave
  • There is plenty of hardware and throughput to serve our load. The reason we allow users to initiate and post threads, is because it is a user to user forum. Moderating the post submission defeats that purpose, and would cause an extra work load for the admin.

    Dave
  • As the original poster, I want to address a few things.

    First, the original script has been in use for more than four years, with scores of mods. Only over the past year or so, has it shown any signs of wear. The tradeoff with using Matt's script, even modified, is in admin flexiblity and the several well known hacks that can wipe out the message board. Hence the reason I haven't posted the URL here. The last thing I need is a bunch of fucking script kiddies running over there trying to topple the board.

    I did buy a copy of Web Board earlier this year. The performance on a dual PII 233 with 512MB RAM (Dell Poweredge 2200) was horrible. There was a nasty issue where Web Board virtually locked up one of the processors. There were also other issues relating to performance.

    Support at the ORA site was anything but but helpful, denying any problems, until some other posts meticulously detailed the issue. Then there was no comment. It's a classic case for Open Source, as there were several on the forum with the chops to take a look and fix what was wrong, but the nature of closed software prohibited such.

    I'm probably not the only one with whom the irony is not lost on the fact the Tim O'Reilly, while lately pushing OSS models, still has Web Board under an commercial license, for a single platform.

    Cost is another issue. Counting NT, SQL Server, Web Board, the cost was near US$3000.00, for software alone. Add hardware and support, plus Resource Kit docs, and it's around US$7000, or US$8000.

    The cost of the current solution, including hardware, is about US$2500.00, plus another US$500 or so in ORA books (I DO like the ORA books and CD kits) Our users perceive our current solution as faster, easier to use. We're all about the users, because they are the one's that make it happen.

    I've got a few solutions being tested, with the most promising three being W3T (deployed since June), Bazaar (went up two days ago, still beta, but GPL and very promising) and one I'm putting up right now, RPG (suggested by another /.er)

    The real problem now, is how to deal with the nearly 30,000 messages in the archive since January.

    Dave

  • The servlet engine is not happening on Cobalt Linux yet. Once they iron the bugs of Jetspeed, it looks like a great way to do this kind of thing, and would be worth changing hardware platforms to be able to accomodate that.


    Dave
  • When I first migrated the mailing list to the Web nearly 5 years ago, I considered NNTP. I'd been on Usenet since about 1989. There were a few like forums at the time on Compuserve. Operating a Wildcat BBS in the mid 80's, the Web was a natural choice.

    I didn't choose NNTP for a variety of reasons. Usenet was out of the question. That was about the time that the public started to find Usenet and we all know what happened after that. NNTP, evenon a private server, isn't as flexible as a Web based board to administer. This is a tightly controled forum, though not fully moderated. There are also user configuration issues to deal with, as an NNTP client is not quite as ubiqutious as a browser. Browsers are easy for the pariticipants. We are finding these same user configuration issues, with IRC for our live chat. We have to remember, not everyone is "hooked up", when it comes to using computers. For the widest audience, we have to cater to the lowest common denominator..

    Dave

  • And there is a chap by the name of Mike Sosteric that took the last GPL version of W3T and did a complete rewrite. He added an API, and cleaned up the code a significant amount. It's pretty much the package on which I've decided. The version 1.0 has better performance than W3T, but has fewer features and a few show stopper issues. The package is called Bazaar, (http://www.icaap.org/Bazaar/) and it's licensed under GPL.

    Though the 2.0 version is still alpha and mostly likely a month or so away from even considering production deployment, Mike is pounding away at the code. Source available via CVS tree at nl.linux.org.

    Dave

  • In about 15 years of various online activities, from Wildcat BBS to Usenet to WWWBoard to Slashdot, and I haven't found that to be the case. I've found linear boards harder to follow, and more easily able to fragment or hinder a discussion, precisely because the thread structure is hard to follow. It's like a mailing list, unless one quotes ruthlessly, it's difficult at times to ascertain where in the disussion one is reading. Threads are a quick, easy way for users to view a message tree, and decide weather or not to read the entire tree, based on the subject titles and posts.

    Dave

  • Yep, I'm using mod_perl. It's not stock on the RaQ2 an has to be added



    Dave

  • It looks like the thread is about to scroll off, so thanks to all for the opinions and information. It was most informative. One thing that has been clear for a while, we need to get off the MIPS box and onto an Intel box. Using the MIPS box adds a level of complexity to the deployments that aren't quite justified.

    We've narrowed it down to a few options, in order of preference.....except for Zope, they are all operating on a testing system, still behind the firewall. Zope will go up in the next few hours (if I can get it to run on the RaQ2.... =:-0 )

    1)Zope based Squishdot/Confra/Zthreads type solution. Probably the best bet for the future. If I get stuck, I can hire DC to help. Anyone that might disagree, I'd love to hear your opinion. Downside, I don't know Python....but that will change. Time for another visit to Fatbrain.......

    2)Bazaar, rewriten from GPL W3T. Still largely alpha. Has a long way to go, and a limited development community. If I were a better coder (or even could be considered a coder), this might make more sense.

    3)RPGBoard. Best of the non data base perl scripts, without a doubt. Fast, well documented, good feature set. I could deploy in just a few hours, and have a robust working site. Downside, I'd perfer something with a more broad developer base, extensable in a more modular fashion.(though SineSweeper seems like a cool guy)On the plus side, depending on how well Zope and Bazaar do in the next few weeks of testing, RPG may very well get the nod. It's mature, and stable with solid performance. Though might not be the best long term solution, it works well, right now.

    Out of the running.......

    Slash....poorly documented, not updated in a timely fashion, and it looks like there might be a fork coming. This is a caveat of Open Source where the community is more into public development than the maintainers. Attitudes from the maintainer (that would be Taco) such as "everytime someone asks about the next release, I delay it another day", speak volumes. I wish the forkers much luck, though I'd be inclined to use a Zope based solution for this type of thing. Instead of forking something that the maintainer isn't really interested in, a better use of energy would be to devote it to another project.....like Zope.

    W3T....Scream seems like a cool guy, but the performance is anything but fast. I applaud the work he has done, but based on the comments of others here, and some DBAs I know, W3T code is still too bloated and not optimized, causing performance issues on busy sites. Maybe now that it's commercial, some of these issues can be addressed.

    Thanks again, you've all been a big help.

    Dave

  • I've written one that isn't generally available (yet) that I'm happy to share freely:

    Take a look and let me know what you think. At the moment account creation is required but the only reason I haven't changed that is because no one has asked me to, it should only take a minute or two :)

    Also, another of my projects Dear Diary [deardiary.net] if anyone wants to take a look at that too :)

  • I know it's not an "optimal" solution, but I'm really surprised that nobody has suggested NNTP/Netnews.

    True, a lot of people prefer a web-based forum, but News has a lot of advantages:

    • Security issues well understood.
    • Good client software available.
    • High performance. I would be REALLY surprised if your configuration couldn't easily handle twice your current traffic with ease if it were a News Server.
    • Administration simplicity.

    All the missing bits that these web-based threaded discussion packages offer could be added in with a fairly simple set of scripts. You could have custom home pages for User bios/information, for example.

    I'm not really advocating dumping a web-based threaded discussion system for News, for one thing your users would probably really hate the change, but it's something that could be considered.

  • Are versions after 3.5.1 complete rewrites? If not, it seems that they violate the GPL, no?

  • Never mind, I keep forgetting that the copyright holder can release their wares under GPL and later release a version not under GPL.

    My mistake...

  • I have to agree that these are good reasons for rejecting NNTP. I did want to put it out there though. I have seen web-based discussion forums that could be done just as well with NNTP.

    Someone should come up with a really good, drop-in, NNTP server with web based administration. Maybe there is one... I dunno.

    The performance of NNTP is quite good and the clients that are included with IE and Netscape are not bad. Having it integrated with mailers is kind of a natural. It's easy for users to manage folders of threads that they want to keep, along with email thread discussions.

    Unfortunately, NNTP is harder to administer than it should be and it's not at all flexible.

  • RPGBoard is THE WWWBoard-style message board script. Actually, comparing it to WWWBoard is a gross understatement [resonatorsoft.com]. RPGBoard has so many features, I can't think of any more! These include:

    Multiple forum support
    Completely new code (now under the GPL)
    New file format with an auto-archive/compress/delete function and file locking
    A message previewer/editor, complete with a spell checker
    Highly configurable with the web-based RPGBoard Configurator
    Selectable backgrounds
    Configurable message tags, including a "No Text" tag
    Default options and bios for the regulars
    Different header styles, including UBB/WWWThreads, WebBBS, the old traditional WWWBoard, and "collapsed threads" mode
    Ability to collate replies to simulate a non-threaded look (and for easier browsing)
    A message search engine
    Name/password detection via cookies
    Interactive date/time stamps with timezone capability and recent message color coding
    Ability for users (and admins) to delete (or undelete) messages
    Partial messages can be saved (good for those really long posts that you don't want to lose)
    A complete stats utility
    A hidden spoiler message box
    Ability to have replies e-mailed to you
    Ability to ban IP addresses as well as an Ignore List for users to use
    Word filter to block cuss words
    IP address/number lookups with proxy detection
    Browser/OS detection
    Year 2000 compliant (unlike WWWBoard)

    Best of all, it's free (and GPL)! I'm not out to make any profit from this. It's simply my part in helping the Internet community have access to a really good message board script. It's really easy to install, too. Just follow the instructions.

    http://www.resonatorsoft.com/softwa re/rpgboard/ [resonatorsoft.com]

    The Message Board War. [resonatorsoft.com]

  • Ahhh...anyway, I hate WWWBoard (and all of those commericial money-grubbing boards) with a passion. I've been working on RPGBoard for over two years now. Of course, most of this is already explained in the info above (and in the links). Ugh, I'm going to get ./ed now...

    --
    Brendan Byrd AKA SineSwiper (sineswiper@resonatorsoft.com)
  • Ugh! I'm almost about to puke! See, this is the type of BS I'm talking about. You don't need to pay $1200 for a freaking message board script! And it doesn't even run on Linux! For that price, I'd want it to do everything including walk my dog and clean my house.

    --
    Brendan Byrd AKA SineSwiper (sineswiper@resonatorsoft.com)

Slashdot Top Deals

This file will self-destruct in five minutes.

Close