3 ms·

Back in the days of PHP 3 it was pretty easy to add PHP to a shared server with things like limits on memory usage and file access. That make it simple for host

Back in the days of PHP 3 it was pretty easy to add PHP to a shared server with things like limits on memory usage and file access. That make it simple for hosts to offer it. They did offer things like Perl as well with mod_perl in Apache, and other languages through mod_cgi, but PHP was the popular one. These days it's probably simpler to offer virtualized servers than shared hosting for anyone who wants to use something else, so there's no reason to change.

KronisLV 5y ago
What about the density of the virtualized resources? KVM or even OpenVZ (or similar) virtualization has a larger amount of overhead in most instances, especially when all that you need is to display a few webpages with very simple interactivity. At the same time, having dedicated (regardless of whether overcomitted or not) resources will probably mean them being used somewhat inefficiently due to idling a lot of time, whereas shared ones could lead to higher density. What about the need to administer these VPSes? Furthermore, administering OSes and updates, as well as packages is definitely not in everyone's skillset. Being given an environment that centers just around what you need - running apps, does seem like the more reasonable choice for the more casual deployments, mom & pop shops etc. (though offerings like Squarespace could eat shared hosting's lunch in those cases nowadays). So you're suggesting that the above are not big enough concerns nowadays and it's still easier to just go the route of VPSes for vendors?