Formerly CMS Watch. Here's our story
What Real Independence means. Find Out
Adriaan Bloem
30-Aug-2010
Tags: Web Content Management, Information Architecture, Sitecore
Danish CMS vendor Sitecore released their new version 6.3 last month. For me, the immediate question always is: how much has changed? It's only a dot release, so it shouldn't be anything major, right? Well, don't let the version numbers fool you.
When I get briefed on new versions of software, vendors are often a bit apologetic when they can't point out some cool new features or interface updates. It's almost as if they're used to briefing people that don't really care all that much about the inner workings of a system. I find that somewhat amusing, since to us, the innards of any system represent a significant part of the whole.
Point in case is Sitecore's 6.3 release. The headline would read something like "adds support for cloud" -- more specifically, Microsoft Azure (with others to follow). Dig a little deeper, and you'll also come across a "more efficient" clustering of content management servers, the machines that provide the editorial interface.
In order to support that, Sitecore has had to do quite a lot of refactoring of the internal infrastructure. 6.3 introduces an "event queue." Basically, the server will signal events (e.g., saving a content item) to the database, and the database will sync this to other servers. This means 6.3 has a lot more flexible scaling options than previous versions. You could, for instance, install one server in the US, and one in Europe; editors would have a faster connection to the server closest to them.
However, when I hear that an "event queue" has been added into the mix, I shiver a bit. I respect Sitecore's usually pretty thorough design and development, and would expect them to get this right. But there are plenty of things I could imagine to go wrong, from small hiccups to large stumbling blocks. I've seen those in plenty of systems that use similar queueing. The key thing here, therefore, is that we won't know until 6.3 is battle-proven in some large scale deployments.
So why is this a minor release, and not -- considering the architectural implications -- a major one? According to Sitecore, versioning is based on "impact on existing implementations," i.e., backwards compatibility. That's sensible; but in this case, don't let it fool you. Sitecore 6.3 adds a lot of potential; potential for flexible scaling, but also potential for choking. We'll be watching to see how it fares in real life scenarios.
Web Content Management Report looks at... Visitor Permissions in Sitecore CMS
"Registered visitor permissions are stored and managed in the same subsystem with internal contributors (albeit segmented out as "external users"). This is a simple and potentially convenient approach. Whether it scales well for large groups of registered visitors is another matter..."
(p. 539)
Learn the real strengths and weaknesses of major CMS vendors from around the world, in our Web Content Management research stream.
Learn the real strengths and weaknesses of forty-four major Web CMS vendors from around the world.
Get the Real Story bi-weekly.
USA & Canada
+1 800 325 6190
UK
+44 (0) 20 3318 1911
International
+1 617 340 6464
All Other Inquiries
"Setting aside the hype and buzzwords of social media technology, The Real Story Group offers a clear, objective and comprehensive review of software products and vendors with a specific focus on their applicability to the enterprise. Before embarking on a collaboration or social media project, this research should be any company's first investment."
Heidi Strom Moon, Director of Marketing, CDG Interactive
Copyright Real Story Group 2001 - 2012. All rights reserved.
All analyst firms claim to be independent or vendor-neutral. We're different.
Get the real story on commercial and open source tools from a firm that works only for you, the technology customer.
Thank you for signing up for The Real Story Group Newsletter. You will receive our monthly newsletter, plus updates with new information on the technology streams you have expressed interest in below.