Stephen Shaffer wrote:
> All,
>
> First off, happy holidays.
>
> Second, we'd like to build up a Linux / Apache web server that will be
> doing a lot of CGI / Perl scripts (older stuff not necessarily
> ModPerl).
>
> Newbie question: what's better for an Linux / Apache Web Server -
> Processor or RAM? Is there a point of diminishing returns for RAM?
>
> Thanks in advnaced,
>
> Steve Shaffer
As always, this very much *depends*. Depends on how intensive the CGI/Perl
stuff is and also how much content they generate.
As a rule, a server dealing with purely static data (html files, etc) will
benefit from increased memory as it will cache a lot of the content to RAM
and serve it from there. Imagine you can cache 100% of your data in RAM,
then additional RAM is "wasted".
Dynamic content on the other hand (as a rule) will benefit from more clock
cycles. HOWEVER, the dynamic content needs to be staged somewhere while
it's generated - enter the RAM part of the equation.
If your scripts are only producing small (<100kB) amounts of content then
you would be better off spending a little extra on the CPU. Once again,
this depends on how many hits you expect etc. If your generated content is
bigger than about 100kB then you really need more RAM AND lots of CPU power
too.
As for the diminishing returns for increased RAM, this is usually more
obvious on systems serving static content (see my previous comments).
Dynamic content will usually benefit from additional RAM until you reach
the limits of the CPU, at which point no amount of RAM will help, only more
clock cycles.
It's really a balancing act. Good luck.
James
--
Fortune cookie says:
Coward, n.:
One who in a perilous emergency thinks with his legs.
-- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
