httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: standard virtual hosting.. how good?
Date Fri, 11 Jun 1999 12:55:22 GMT
David Harris wrote:
> Tony Finch wrote:
> > IP-based vhosts are looked up with a hash; Host:-header vhosts are
> > looked up linearly.
> >

Most likely, we could do better for name-based ;)

> > We have some machines with about 1000 <VirtualHost> configuration
> > sections and one of the problems it the time it takes to parse the
> > configuration file (but that's an old version of Apache & newer ones
> > may be better). The other problem with using <VirtualHost> in our
> > environment is the number of changes we get: with the mass vhosting
> > stuff we can provision sites almost immediately without disrupting
> > Apache.
> I see your point about Apache parsing the configuration - I would really
> hate to have a server that took, say, twenty seconds to start. But if you
> gracefully restart a server that takes this long to parse configuration, is
> there be any downtime while the parent parses the configuration, or does it
> continue to hand requests out to the (soon to be) previous generation of
> children while parsing?

During graceful restarts, the child processes continue to handle
their requests, including keepalives, but the parent process must parse
the config before it can spawn the next gen. Even on our larger servers,
this parsing is quick (less than a second clock time, if that) although
the checking for each DocRoot is a pain.
> But I'm still very interested in this setup. I really like not having to HUP
> apache for each new account.

I found mod_macro very uses since it really simplifies the config file
format for numerous vhosts. The mass-vhost patch is very nice and
would complete the picture. I'm unsure about the performance aspect
of the rewriting of the request, but it's a good solution.

   Jim Jagielski   |||   |||
            "That's no ordinary rabbit... that's the most foul,
            cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever laid eyes on"

View raw message