httpd-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joshua Slive <>
Subject Re: [users@httpd] Some copies of Apache or Some virtual sites - What is better?
Date Fri, 22 Oct 2004 18:11:03 GMT
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:57:55 +0200, Avi Klempner
<> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have 5 different web based applications running apache, they all need to
> be co-hosted on the same physical machine. What is the best way for doing
> it:
> Run a single copy of Apache that maintains two or more web sites as virtual
> sites.
> Run two (or more) copies of Apache, each maintaining a single site.
> All applications running the same apache version, some of them needs
> different modules.
> I am interested with a comprehensive solution for both
> usability,performance, maintenance etc...

There is no single answer to this question.  It is a tradeoff.

Some of the elements in the equation:

Multiple apaches:
- Are more stable, since one crashing can't take out the others.
- Allow you to use only the modules you need for each site, which
could save resources.
- Allow more flexibility for file-system permissions (each can run
under a different userid)

Virtual hosts:
- Are easier to configure and maintain.
- May use slightly less resources, since they can share the idle server pool.
- Don't require multiple IP addresses.


The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
   "   from the digest:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message