Master Logon?

[DaveNF2G]

Apologies as this has probably come up before, but I can't find anything on it.

Is there something technical preventing RR users from having a single master login for the Forums, the DB and the Wiki?

 

[rwier]

Apologies as this has probably come up before, but I can't find anything on it.

Is there something technical preventing RR users from having a single master login for the Forums, the DB and the Wiki?

Interesting, I never noticed that.

 

[QDP2012]

Apologies as this has probably come up before, but I can't find anything on it.

Is there something technical preventing RR users from having a single master login for the Forums, the DB and the Wiki?

• If I remember correctly, I think it relates to the server-load balancing techniques, and is the same reason the automatic log-out inactivity-timer is set differently for the three log-ins -- DB, forums, wiki.
  
  When considering only those users who log-in (and not those visitors who browse anonymously), the forums are busier than the DB, which is busier than the Wiki (if I remember correctly). This means that the server-load to maintain the connections varies for each server. This "causes" the server admins to set the inactivity-timers differently, to minimize unnecessary load on the servers.
  
  For example, the inactivity-timer that logs people out of the forums is much shorter than the inactivity-timer for the wiki, because it is much more likely that someone will log-in to the forums, and post a comment, and then forget to log-off, compared to someone who logs into the wiki who might be "slowly" editing their pages-of-interest.
  
  In short, a unified-login might be possible, but would increase the server-load by having "unused" connections persist across all three servers, when the user is only using one of the servers.
  
  
• Then there is also the question of how to handle the connections when premium-members connect via software (ARC..., Win..., etc.) to the DB. With a unified log-in, it might cause the server to connect to all three systems, when a connection to the DB is the only thing needed at that moment.
  
  
• I'm not sure if it is still true, but a while ago, one of the admins/mods mentioned that the DB is on its own physical machine, but that the forums and wiki share a machine. If a unified log-in required persistent connections to all three servers, then it might require an "expensive" physical upgrade to move the wiki to its own machine just to handle the connection-load. But, I don't have confirmation on that right now.

I'm still looking for the threads I read on this, but they are several years old.

Edit: Links to other threads/posts...

• In this post, Chauffeur6 mentions that even for the forums, several servers are used to balance the load and sometimes even within just the forums, the load-balancing can get "slightly out of sync". Trying to sync the DB, forums, and wiki for a unified log-in might be more difficult. ...just a thought.
  
  
• In this thread, Mr. Blanton explains what happened to the server(s) when CNN told everyone to go to RR to listen to scanners online (which is now Broadcastify, I know). But, if there was an unexpected large increase in the number of people logged-in to the forums, a unified login would also make that happen to the DB and the wiki at the same time. Separate log-ins help prevent servers from being overloaded.
  
  
• There might be other ways to unify the log-ins and still provide the necessary load-balance protections, but they're probably not inexpensive and not a quick-fix.

Just a thought,

 

[ProScan]

Apologies as this has probably come up before, but I can't find anything on it.

Is there something technical preventing RR users from having a single master login for the Forums, the DB and the Wiki?

I would like to see a single Log In also. I think it can be done regardless of the Server architecture using a simple PHP script. Just need one cookie on the browser hard drive for session control.

QDP2012, Sorry, I disagree with you on a few things.

If I remember correctly, I think it relates to the server-load balancing techniques, and is the same reason the automatic log-out inactivity-timer is set differently for the three log-ins -- DB, forums, wiki.

When considering only those users who log-in (and not those visitors who browse anonymously), the forums are busier than the DB, which is busier than the Wiki (if I remember correctly). This means that the server-load to maintain the connections varies for each server. This "causes" the server admins to set the inactivity-timers differently, to minimize unnecessary load on the servers.

For example, the inactivity-timer that logs people out of the forums is much shorter than the inactivity-timer for the wiki, because it is much more likely that someone will log-in to the forums, and post a comment, and then forget to log-off, compared to someone who logs into the wiki who might be "slowly" editing their pages-of-interest.

In short, a unified-login might be possible, but would increase the server-load by having "unused" connections persist across all three servers, when the user is only using one of the servers.

Web Servers work on HTTP, the browser sends a request and the server answers back with a response. After the browser receives a response then the connection is closed. So no "unused" connections. Connections may appear to persist because the session is logged with a cookie on the hard drive.

Then there is also the question of how to handle the connections when premium-members connect via software (ARC..., Win..., etc.) to the DB. With a unified log-in, it might cause the server to connect to all three systems, when a connection to the DB is the only thing needed at that moment.

Not an issue. The browser sends a TCP packet containing the URL address to the desired server. The browser drops the connection after the response.

 

[QDP2012]

...QDP2012, Sorry, I disagree with you on a few things....

No problem. My recollection of the earlier explanations could very easily be wrong. I haven't had time (and won't have for several days) to try to find the specific related old threads. I look forward to an admin clarifying the correct answer.

Thanks for the explanation on how it might work in the future.