Re: Vhosts running as different userids (was: Re: Inclusion of mpm-itk into HEAD)
* William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-08-05 05:15]: I've looked through the archives, but have not seen this mentioned again since then. I was wondering if this has been discussed any further, possibly moved to other mailing lists, and/or if it's been added to a roadmap for future releases. None of the above. There has been activity on the www.apache.org/wiki/httpd site w.r.t. setting up per-user hosts in parallel, but not much else. OK. Say you have a server with 1000 vhosts, what performance penalties must be expected from this solution? Just more memory (and if so, roughly how much)? It takes a specific developer hacking at a solution, and for the developer to respond to the concerns/criticisms, to ultimately end up with code that we might incorporate in svn trunk. Yes, I'm aware of that. One of the reasons for asking was to check if this is the preferred way of fixing this problem or if there are other (possibly better) suggestions out there. Thank you for your replies. -- Vegard Svanberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] (EFnet)]
Re: Vhosts running as different userids (was: Re: Inclusion of mpm-itk into HEAD)
On 8/5/07, Vegard Svanberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-08-05 05:15]: I've looked through the archives, but have not seen this mentioned again since then. I was wondering if this has been discussed any further, possibly moved to other mailing lists, and/or if it's been added to a roadmap for future releases. None of the above. There has been activity on the www.apache.org/wiki/httpd site w.r.t. setting up per-user hosts in parallel, but not much else. OK. Say you have a server with 1000 vhosts, what performance penalties must be expected from this solution? Just more memory (and if so, roughly how much)? This question might be better answered on the users list. There is no single answer to that, because it depends on exactly what kind of hosts we are talking about. But in general, 1000 is too many hosts for true isolation on a single box. That is because any decently-performing isolation solution involves keeping a pool of threads/processes available under each userid. And 1000 pools of threads or processes is really going to be at the limit of any reasonable hardware/software. Of course, you could spread the back-ends among many boxes if you wanted, but then it isn't a true name-based virtual hosting solution. So what you are asking about is more a general architecture question than a specific apache configuration issue. But to answer your specific question, if you were serving only static content, then the proxy solution is probably going to use approximately twice as much resources as a standard vhosting setup. But I would expect that normally you are talking about somewhat heavy-weight back-ends. In this case, you will use substantially less than twice as much resources, because the front-end can be very light-weight. Again, there is no single answer. Joshua. It takes a specific developer hacking at a solution, and for the developer to respond to the concerns/criticisms, to ultimately end up with code that we might incorporate in svn trunk. Yes, I'm aware of that. One of the reasons for asking was to check if this is the preferred way of fixing this problem or if there are other (possibly better) suggestions out there. Thank you for your replies. -- Vegard Svanberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] (EFnet)]
Vhosts running as different userids (was: Re: Inclusion of mpm-itk into HEAD)
In the thread Inclusion of mpm-itk into HEAD, Paul Querna ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and Joshua Slive's ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) posts on June 25th brings up a streamlined proxy approach (my words) to separate apache processes user ids, most commonly a very much wanted/requested feature in (large) virtual hosted environments. I've looked through the archives, but have not seen this mentioned again since then. I was wondering if this has been discussed any further, possibly moved to other mailing lists, and/or if it's been added to a roadmap for future releases. Thanks. -- Vegard Svanberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] (EFnet)]
Re: Vhosts running as different userids (was: Re: Inclusion of mpm-itk into HEAD)
Vegard Svanberg wrote: In the thread Inclusion of mpm-itk into HEAD, Paul Querna ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and Joshua Slive's ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) posts on June 25th brings up a streamlined proxy approach (my words) to separate apache processes user ids, most commonly a very much wanted/requested feature in (large) virtual hosted environments. I've looked through the archives, but have not seen this mentioned again since then. I was wondering if this has been discussed any further, possibly moved to other mailing lists, and/or if it's been added to a roadmap for future releases. None of the above. There has been activity on the www.apache.org/wiki/httpd site w.r.t. setting up per-user hosts in parallel, but not much else. It takes a specific developer hacking at a solution, and for the developer to respond to the concerns/criticisms, to ultimately end up with code that we might incorporate in svn trunk. Bill
