[sf-perl] Fuzzy mod_perl memory requirements super fun question

Joseph Brenner doom at kzsu.stanford.edu
Thu Jul 21 22:35:38 PDT 2005

Quinn Weaver <qw at sf.pm.org> wrote:

> The question is, how much RAM do you need to run mod_perl reasonably
> these days?  I mean mod_perl 2.0.  Likely I'll be running some big
> stuff like Mason on top, which could add a lot.  Actually, let's throw
> in PostgreSQL; I'm using it too.
> This is for a dynamic page server, i.e. all static page requests will
> be handled by a separate box via reverse proxying.  Hence network
> latency shouldn't be the limiting factor.  I don't expect CPU speed to
> be a limiting factor, either, but I'll ask just in case.  What is the
> oldest CPU I can get away with using?
> These are all fuzzy questions, I know, and I don't expect studies or
> graphs.  Just an anecdotal "well, this system worked for me under
> such-and-such conditions" would be fabulous.

I think my anecdotal evidence may be even fuzzier than your questions,
but let me get things started.  

How much memory should you get?  As much as you can afford.  
How much memory could you get away with?  Probably less than you think.

At home I often mess around with original Pentium boxes with only about
640 Mb (hardware manufacturers don't make a lot of money off of me). 
A box like this is ancient by today's standards, and they do huff and
puff a bit on occasion, but then I'm often running X windows on them as well.

I would guess you should shoot for a gigabyte of memory or more, and an
AMD/Intel [1] architecture processor from a generation or two back.
Oh, and while you can probably live with IDE disk drives, my guess is
you're still much better off with SCSI, despite what you hear from
slash-kids these days.

And plan on getting a second, similar box at some point if that one
starts hitting a wall: it's not that difficult to run Postgresql on
another box.

[1] Preferably AMD.  Remember what Intel did to Randall Schwartz.

More information about the SanFrancisco-pm mailing list