By andrewbenkard on

My ~10 low-traffic Drupal sites are moving to a shared host, Pair. I need to run a fair number of modules, including the memory-hungry imagecache that is happiest with 96M.

However, the hosting plan I'm on limits memory usage to 16M.

So I need to size the tradeoffs.

1) Where will users see performance hits when Drupal is running on 16M? At all times? Only when using some modules? During busy times?

2) Is multisite more memory-efficient? That is, will I see better performance overall when running a single instance of core? My alternative is to do standalone instances (which might be preferable from a simplicity perspective, since I am taking the plunge into SVN).

⋅ Categories: Drupal 6.x

Comments

steve hanson’s picture

steve hanson commented

Really - there's no way you're going to be able to run Drupal with any number of modules in that environment. You'll just have constant white blanks screens. You won't have performance hits - you'll have no site at all.

Steve Hanson
Publisher Eye On Dunn County
https://eyeondunn.com

andrewbenkard’s picture

andrewbenkard commented

Thanks Steve

Yet, I have three sites loaded up already, and while I can't call them _fast_ , they're working. (again: these are low volume sites)

My concern is if (and when) I add more sites and get more traffic. I loathe changing hosts and am doing a reality check before consolidating the rest in a single environment.

andrewbenkard’s picture

andrewbenkard commented

A little more research and I now think that managed vps (at a host with an upgrade path) is the way to go, and fits into my budget.

My question about multisite still stands - What's more efficient from a memory perspective?

1) drupal multisite with 25 domains

2) 25 separate drupal instances

TIA!

andrewbenkard’s picture

andrewbenkard commented

continued here: http://drupal.org/node/434860