User Tools

Site Tools



dokuwiki 2010-11-07 "anteater" versus Confluence 3.4.1

User Interface

A clear downside to (an unmodified) dokuwiki is how it handles hierarchies of pages - you either have to manually move the files within the filesystem or install the PageMove plugin. (See for more details.)

In Confluence, the page name is in the URL, and it's parent page is part of the URL path. In other words: versus:

Also, the plugin management from Atlassian is better tied into the management interface

from a sysadmin POV

Dokuwiki has a low backup, system and maintenance footprint compared to Confluence. It's all in one directory so you can tar it up as a backup since there is no database connection to deal with.

While there are dependencies on PHP, you don't have to deal with installing Sun Java – something Confluence must run on, and isn't typically setup or available by default in package managers.

Memory-wise, Confluence requires 2GB at least. That works out to $80/month for a Linode VPS instance versus cheap shared hosting at say, Dreamhost.

the verdict? or, why sp00nfeeder uses dokuwiki

As usual, the correct answer is it will depend on the “situation” – or what the requirements are. Since I have an existing account on Dreamhost, I might as well make better use of what I'm paying for. Also, it's an excuse to go back to the original wiki I had started using versus Confluence, which I use as my personal knowledge base.

dokuwiki/dokuwiki.txt · Last modified: 2012/12/20 19:57 by admin