httpd-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Swift <Swi...@swiftys.org.uk>
Subject Re: [users@httpd] vhosts conf file efficiency
Date Sun, 12 Feb 2012 13:14:54 GMT
I don't think it would make a significant difference if you had a single
file with 2000 vhosts, or 2000 files with one vhost each.

Having them all in one file would make life easier if you needed to make a
global change.

One caveat: Don't ever rely on a a wildcard INCLUDE for the order of your
vhosts. This probably only matters for the first vhost, which is the
default for any request which doesn't match any vhost.

On 12 February 2012 06:35, Nick Edwards <nick.z.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Is it more efficient for all virtualhost blocks to be in a single
> file, eg httpd-vhosts.conf, or for each of them to be in their own
> "one file per domain" via an include hosts.d/*.conf
> We are talking a minimum of 2000 hosts per machine.
>
> Memory I assume would be the same since it needs to know every domain,
> but hows it for speed of starts?
>
> Any other caveats, like file descriptor issues?
>
> Thanks
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
> See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
>   "   from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Steve Swift
http://www.swiftys.org.uk

Mime
View raw message