Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

> If you have 1024 static sites the only thing taking up ram is the configuration of the sites sitting in Apache's memory. As long as there isn't a lot of traffic on the site, it doesn't really matter how many there are.

And if you're smart about the setup, you don't even necessarily have to have a separate configuration for each site. See mod_vhost_alias for Apache, for instance. With that in place, memory is no longer an issue at all.




Why would you use apache for static sites? Did you even read the article? It uses lighttpd.


By way of example. I'm sure there's equivalent incantations for lighttpd/nginx/flavor-of-the-week, the parent comment just happened to mention Apache. :)


Agreed. Using apache on a lowendbox is not a smart idea. Lighttpd serving static sites takes ~5MB in practise. That's also including a SSHd and other services.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: