No, the solution were deploying now is the solution.. We'll just have to deploy more servers as we grow bigger and bigger.
So basically, there IS no solution to x10hosting's problems at the moment. Up time will only get worse and worse as more and more users join.
Therefore, as much as I like cPanel, I think it's in everyone's best interest if x10hosting switched to a different system. :/
We've looked at alternative panels and from testing and talking with sales departments none of them will be able to handle the amount of accounts. Switching panels would also mean rewriting A LOT of code. Everything we've created is made to work with cPanel's API.
cPanel told us that they will add our request to their bug tracker and it will get updated sometime... no ETA though so we're not able to sit around and wait.
The solution we just attempted switching to over the past month would have solved a lot of problems... we're very frustrated that after all the work we've put in and money spent we pretty much have to roll everything back all because of a 3 digit number in some encoded file somewhere.
We have came up with an alternative and are working on implementing it now... it's going to take a little bit though as we have a lot of work to do to get it going and also to undo everything we have done for the failed one. Hopefully I'll have some better news this evening after I've finished more testing.
Last edited by Corey; 07-10-2010 at 12:51 PM.
i still don't get why cpanel feels that they cant change the file. It shouldn't take more that a day at MOST to do. As far as no other panel being able to support the number of accounts that is odd but i guess not too unexpected i wonder if it would help if a panel could run on a single dedicated server for the panel and have the accounts on another one totally with just a daemon to let the master manage the others in theory it would work great. Hey im sure u guys checked it but why wouldn't kloxo work with the number of accounts? Since it seems to be able to do something similar to the above stated.
Last edited by CWeb Creative; 07-11-2010 at 03:01 PM.
My guess is there's maybe more than 1 place it's encoded, or there's other locations that draw directly from that number, and that increasing it could seriously fubar the rest of the app.
But more than likely, they simply forgot -where- that number is and didn't want to deal with it.
Customer Service Team Associate
we're not doing it the same way as we already tried.