Re: [cobalt-users] OT: Apache Limitations

[Kris Dahl <krislists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

on 8/24/00 3:29 PM, Cody Watkins at codyw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Can anybody comment on the following situation:
> 
> Can apache handle nearly 8000 VirtualHost entrys?
> We know a RaQ probably can't handle this. So basically we want to put 8000
> domains on a RH Linux 6.2 box running @ 700Mhz w/ 512MB RAM (each site will
> only consist of 2-3 low usage pages). Can we put 8000 of the following in a
> seperate conf file and use the Include command in the httpd.conf file:
> <VirtualHost 12.34.45.56>
> ServerName myname.com
> ServerAlias www.myname.com
> DocumentRoot /home/myname.com/
> </VirtualHost>

You are *definately* going to want to read up on the mass hosting options of
Apache.  Check out http://www.apache.org/docs/vhosts/mass.html, as it is
essentially a white paper/documentation on what you are trying to do.

Very cool stuff and will probably help you out quite a bit.

I would say your biggest barrier is going to be if you are going to
potentially have 8000 users that are going to be FTPing, sshing, etc. into
that machine.  I would *not* suggest it as you are very likely to have some
serious problems.  If you build a content management system to let you
clients (if applicable) manage their content you and them will have an
easier time.

> Also, can BIND (DNS) handle around 8000 domains?

According to my documentation I don't see a real hard limit.  However, you
are going to want to have a decent amount of memory, fast disk, etc. as
loading that many db files, etc. will tax the system somewhat.

Obviously you'll want to create your own tools (I would actually put in a
MySQL or other database and manage the records like that and run a PERL
script to snag and output the config files properly formatted) to manage
this stuff.

On you machine, I realize that you are not expecting a lot of traffic on
them, but I would highly suggest getting a real decent machine to handle the
load.  If you have 8000 domains, assuming that you used a bulk registration
service, that represents a minimum of $120,000 on registration fees.  I
don't think it would be out of line to spend $10,000 on a server.  Get RAID
with fast disks, fast processors, and >768M of RAM.

I would have a hard time hosting that much stuff on a single server,
honestly and would probably build a cluster (not knowing what you
application is exactly this may or may not be an option).

If you are planning on having that many users having direct access to the
server, I would suggest the acquisition of several machines and have ~3000
on each (which isn't really too much).  The thing is about shared servers is
that it only takes one idiot to potentially take the whole thing down.  Its
like what I call the Titanic principle... instead of having 8000 pissed off
customers, you only have 3000.

-k