What problems could arise from updating php version?
-
i havent really gotten a straight answer yet for this question - my client says:
"The developers are skeptical about the possibility to update PHP on our server as this could seriously damage the entire RV site functionality."
since i know nothing about php and any potential hazards i have to ask the community to see if there is any validity to these concerns.
we cant update our version of WP unless the version of php is first upgraded from 5.1.6 to 5.2.4
client wont do this because developers say its a potential nightmare
i , as seo, want a current updated version of WP for many obvious reasons
can anyone please tell me what, if any, problems could arise from upgrading the sites php? or is it just a lot of work and the developers are making excuses because they dont want to do it?
thanks very much to whoever answers
-
Alan,
I cannot think of an answer I have seen recently with the clarity of thought and ability to refute a very bad practice. (Especially on a security level). One thing we do with clients and upgrades (we do not handle clients on other peoples platforms) is to take a new update, give it a few weeks for bugs to be discovered and then do the upgrade on our end. We have clients sign off on us handling the upgrades, etc. from the beginning of the relationship.
For Erik I would suggest showing the client what has been said by someone with a lot of savvy experience. If the devs are worth their salt, they will change.
This was a good question and Alan delivered a great answer.
Robert
-
I've got very limited bandwidth for training (90% of my work comes from audits) - and is typically limited to in-person on-site for clients in the LA area because I find the in-person experience to be much more effective. Pricing depends on level and extent, and starts at $250 an hour so is ideal for groups (one fee regardless of participant count). Audits range from $3500 upwards of $7500 or more depending on scale.
-
what do you charge for
Individual Personalized Training? and site audits?
-
You can thank my combined 11 years SEO after 7 years web dev project management, with a background in information security and business ownership
-
i want to have your baby
brilliant answer!
i just copy/pasted the entire thing to my client - even got your pic and bio in there for added cred.
i have been asking this question in one way or another since early Feb. and you just nailed it
thank you very much
-
Any time you upgrade a server solution, the potential exists for things that are currently working to suddenly break. That is just the nature of technology. In an ideal world, this wouldn't happen, however unfortunately it's quite possible for many reasons.
Just one reason is technology developers cannot possibly test for every single unique server configuration on earth when working on an upgrade. They have time, resource and fiscal constraints.
In one example of how an upgrade from PHP 5.1.6 to 5.2.4 caused a WP site to collapse, the problem was neither with PHP OR WP. It was with a separate server solution related to firewalls that had to then be dealt with.
That example validates the concern expressed by the developers you're dealing with.
HOWEVER
Regardless of potential problems of this nature, it is irresponsible and deplorable for developers to refuse to upgrade servers out of the fear that something might break. Could you imagine 90% of the world still operating on IBM mainframe computers because of a fear to upgrade? The security implications alone are appalling, let alone business-case reasons.
Developers and systems administrators "should" be required to implement upgrades on a regular consistent basis, with the understanding that it is their responsibility to deal with problems that may arise, and during upgrades "should" also use intelligent best practices precautions and methods to ensure the least likely chance for a critical failure. THAT is the only proper business path for a business to remain successful long-term.
Hiding under the guise of "it's too dangerous" is a terrible pitiful excuse for laziness.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
UK version of site showing US Cache and meta description
Hi Fellow Moz'ers We seem to have an issue where some of our UK site is showing meta descriptions from our US site in the serp's and when you check the cache: of the site it's brining up the .com instead of the .co.uk site. example: cache:https://www.tinyme.co.uk/name-labels shows the US site We've checked the href lang tags and they look ok to me (but i'm not an expert) https://www.tinyme.co.uk/name-labels" hreflang="en-gb"/> https://www.tinyme.com/name-labels" hreflang="en-us"/> https://www.tinyme.com.au/name-labels" hreflang="x-default" /> https://www.tinyme.com.au/name-labels" hreflang="en-au"/> We've had a search around and seen people have similar issues, but cant seem to find a definitive solution.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | tinyme1 -
Google cache is for a 3rd parties site for HTTP version and correct for HTTPS
If I search Google for my cache I get the following: cache:http://www.saucydates.com -> Returns the cache of netball.org (HTTPS page with Plesk default page) cache:https://www.saucydates.com -> Displays the correct page Prior to this my http cache was the Central Bank of Afghanistan. For most searches at present my index page is not returned and when it is, it’s the Net Ball Plesk page. This is, of course hurting my search traffic considerably. ** I have tried many things, here is the current list:** If I fetch as Google in webmaster tools the HTTPS fetch and render is correct. If I fetch the HTTP version I get a redirect (which is correct as I have a 301 HTTP to HTTPS redirect). If I turn off HTTPS on my server and remove the redirect the fetch and render for HTTP version is correct. The 301 redirect is controlled with the 301 Safe redirect option in Plesk 12.x The SSL cert is valid and with COMODO I have ensured the IP address (which is shared with a few other domains that form my sites network / functions) has a default site I have placed a site on my PTR record and ensured the HTTPS version goes back to HTTP as it doesn’t need SSL I have checked my site in Waybackwhen for 1 year and there are no hacked redirects I have checked the Netball site in Waybackwhen for 1 year, mid last year there is an odd firewall alert page. If you check the cache for the https version of the netball site you get another sites default plesk page. This happened at the same time I implemented SSL Points 6 and 7 have been done to stop the server showing a Plesk Default page as I think this could be the issue (duplicate content) ** Ideas:** Is this a 302 redirect hi-jack? Is this a Google bug? Is this an issue with duplicate content as both servers can have a default Plesk page (like millions of others!) A network of 3 sites mixed up that have plesk could be a clue? Over to the experts at MOZ, can you help? Thanks, David
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dmcubed0 -
Translated version of meta description showing in SERPs
Hi all, When a search for our brand is done, the homepage is shown but the meta description is in French. We have a translated version of the site available once the user is on the site, but there's no reason it should be displaying the translated version in the SERPs. This issue has never happened before and began last week. Anyone seen anything similar? https://www.google.com/search?q=revolve+clothing Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ggpaul5620 -
Publishing pages with thin content, update later?
So I have about 285 pages I created with very, very thin content on each. Each is unique, and each serves its own purpose. My question is, do you guys think it is wise to publish all of these at once to just get them out there and update each as we go along? Each page is very laser targeted and I anticipate that a large handful will actually rank soon after publishing. Thanks! Tom
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TomBinga11250 -
How long does it take for google to update my meta tag des?
Hi Guys: I have 3 top level domains, basically - I can see that my website is ranking in another country (USA) for my keyword - however the domain name that is showing up for the USA search is correct, but the meta tag description is incorrect, this meta tag description is for the NZ domain - not the USA domain. I have updated the hreflang tags, when i submit my new sitemap how long does it take google to update the meta tag description? new
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | edward-may0 -
301 to trailing slash version then canonical
Hi Mozzers I'm just doing an audit for a client and see that all non-trailing-slash URLs are 301'd to trailing-slash URLS. So far so good. But then all the trailing-slash URLs are canonicalled back to the non-trailing-slash URLs. This feels wrong to me, but is it? Never come across this before. Should the canonicals just be removed? Any help much appreciated
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Chammy0 -
WP plugins not updating - unable to remove
how can i update plugins if i get this: Downloading update from http://downloads.wordpress.org/plugin/akismet.2.5.7.zip… Unpacking the update… Installing the latest version… Removing the old version of the plugin… Could not remove the old plugin. Plugin update failed. same for AIOSEO
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ezpro90 -
Have a problem with our home page. Is temporary 301 redirect an option?
Hey Mozers, I discovered this morning that the home page for my website is rendering fine in Chrome and Firefox, but very poorly in IE. My analytics show that over 50% of my visitors are using IE. As a result of the problem, IE has a bounce rate 32% higher than other browsers. I'm not a web developer and I'm fairly new to SEO, so I'm guessing that it's going to take me at least a couple days to get it fixed. In the meantime, I was considering doing a 301 redirect from the home page to the largest category page in hopes of keeping some of the IE users from bouncing while I get the home page sorted out. Would there be any long term negative effects from this once I get the page sorted out and take the 301 off it? Are there any other solutions that would be better? Thanks for the help!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | matthewbyers0