[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Apache 1.3 mass virtual hosting recipe



On September 22, 2004 10:10 am, Raúl Alexis Betancort Santana wrote:

> I wonder how running a script inside a mod_rewrite rule is better that
> defining a new NameVirtualHost directive, moreover taking into account that

It's better (IMO) because I do not have to configure apache.  My admin 
interface is greatly simplified because apache configuration does not need to 
be done. I create a user who has a homedir in the appropriate location (or at 
least who has access to the appropriate created location) and setup is 
complete.

> that rewriting rule will run the script EVERY TIME a request reach the
> server, I hope you don't have high volume traffict to that server or you
> will go into troubles.

The script runs continually, it is not started for every incoming request.  
Apache has a filehandle for the script's stdin and stdout, the overhead of 
running the script will be very minimal and the script will not introduce 
much delay.  Checking for a few directories is no different than many apache 
servers that check for .htaccess files all the way up to the root of the 
filesystem, it does so very quickly.

When server traffic gets too high I will simply add servers but I see no 
reason why this setup can't host hundreds of typical low-volume sites, I may 
be proved wrong of course ;-)

I would not use this for a very high traffic site, I wouldn't host a very high 
traffic site on a shared server period.

> I better follow this way ...
>
> httpd.conf (apache 1.3.X, apache 2.X doit automaticatly)
> ...
> Include /etc/apache/domains.d
> ...
>
> then simple create the <domain>.conf file from a template for example, and
> drop it inside /etc/apached/domains.d a simple /etc/init.d/apache reload
> and thats all, no need to check on every request to were should I get the
> files.

On previous servers I have used the template approach.  I don't like to 
creating hundreds of nearly identical configs, to me identical means 
redundant.

-- 
Fraser Campbell <fraser@wehave.net>                 http://www.wehave.net/
Georgetown, Ontario, Canada                               Debian GNU/Linux



Reply to: