I'd go with 256MB. I wouldn't run Mongrel though, others may  
disagree. I use Lighttpd with static FastCGI for my sites and all our  
client sites we do with Radiant.

Lighttpd will really reduce your virtual server overhead as compared  
to running Apache and by using FastCGI you reduce the complexity of  
the overall setup by removing the need for any kind of Proxying.

Most of our clients run fine with lighttpd connecting to 3 static  
fastcgi processes. Lighttpd also allows you to set min and max  
fastcgi connections so the app can scale on demand to a certain  
extent based on load.

But others on this list might swear by Mongrel, I wouldn't use it in  
a virtual server environment though, at least not at 128 or 256  
memory points. Also, make sure you tweak your MySQL configuration  
well, InnoDB is a memory hog and MySQL will easily eat way more  
memory than your actual app will.


-James

On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:07 AM, Keith Bingman wrote:

> I have talked a customer into using Radiant for a small project, but
> they would like to remain with their server, who does not offer
> Rails. However, they offer virtual machines and have Rails apps
> running on those. So far so good. My question is how much RAM should
> I go for? They offer 128 MB and 256 MB for only a little more. Is 128
> enough or should I just talk them into the 256 and save everybody
> some time?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Keith Bingman
> Tel: +49-7731-79838380
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://keithbingman.com
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Radiant mailing list
> Post:   [email protected]
> Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/
> Site:   http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
>

_______________________________________________
Radiant mailing list
Post:   [email protected]
Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/
Site:   http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant

Reply via email to