Question Subscriber/domain migrations/balancing across service nodes

[Brightside]

Currently I have Plesk Multi Server with one service node (subscriptions are provisioned via WHMCS). My case is I would like to add second service node later and move all subscriptions there or I would like to move specific subscriptions to this second node (let's say I plan to move subscriptions with service plan XXX and YYY, and keep subscriptions with service plan ZZZ on first node). Also there is possible case when I would like just replace node XXX by node YYY and terminate node XXX after that. So there are three cases:

1. Service plan based approach.
2. Manual settings and possibility of manual manipulation of subscriptions (also it would great to specify somewhere maximum subscriptions count for service node)
3. Migration from service node XXX to node YYY.

Sure. All these cases depends from centralized DNS and mail management.

 

[Anthony]

There is no such ability in Plesk Multi Server. I have created the feature request.

 

[Elmoonfire]

Hi Anthony, I'm confused. Administrative balancing (moving a subscription's files between service nodes) has been on the roadmap for almost a year and a half:
Roadmap

Has this not actually been an actively developed feature? Is development for this product dead as there has been no news or updates in over 8 months.

I have been paying for this product since it came out with the assumption that some development would occur, maybe not the same pace as core Plesk but at least some progress. I have been patiently waiting for administrative balancing, centralized DNS and the ability to secure the master node with Security Advisor for over a year with no sign of them coming to fruition. Missing these features makes it impossible for me to migrate my entire network of sites over to this infrastructure design with multi server and has me questioning if I should discontinue paying for it.

I would love to have some glimmer of hope that updates are imminent or I may need to modify my subscriptions.

Thank you

 

[Brightside]

Missing these features makes it impossible for me to migrate my entire network of sites over to this infrastructure design with multi server and has me questioning if I should discontinue paying for it.

I have another situation. I can start my project using Plesk Multi Server, but absence of features like mirgation and smart distribution subscription across nodes makes it impossible to manage the infrastructure I have in future. That's my main concern.

 

[Anthony]

Has this not actually been an actively developed feature? Is development for this product dead as there has been no news or updates in over 8 months.

This feature is not in active development right now since our team is focused on delivery of main product release and improving the features like Let's Encrypt and Advisor. But it's not dead and we are still planning to deliver the new updates to this project. I have no exact ETA but this all information that I can provide.

 

[Elmoonfire]

Thank you for responding with an honest answer. You could have just given us the typical this is being worked on and should be ready soon but months go by with nothing to show for it. As such this is a much more satisfying response though still disappointing.

I fully believe that this is the future growth of the Plesk platform with the hopeful eventual development of active load balancing using this multi server mechanism. If Plesk was able to nail down the High Availability / Active Load Balancing need through this Multi Server product this software would be the obvious go to software for most large sites as it is currently a substantial chore to get that setup manually. Plus any Load Balancing solutions I have found does not play nice with Plesk so you are forced to drop it for those sites.

I'll keep paying for this software as I just upgraded to the Hosting Package to get the CGroups extension but it would be really nice to get at least quarterly updates on the development status for this extension. Even if that means telling us something has to be developed first in the main product release before development continues here.

Thanks Anthony