3 ms·

I have a similar setup for my personal and project websites. Some similarities and differences: * I use Linode VMs ($5/month). * I too use Debian GNU/Linux.

by susam 3y ago

I have a similar setup for my personal and project websites. Some similarities and differences: * I use Linode VMs ($5/month). * I too use Debian GNU/Linux. * I use Common Lisp to write the software. * In case of a personal website or blog, a static website is generated by a Common Lisp program. In case of an online service or web application, the service is written as a Common Lisp program that uses Hunchentoot to process HTTP requests and return HTTP responses. * I too use systemd unit files to ensure that the website/service starts automatically when the VM starts or restarts. Most of my unit files are about 10-15 lines long. * The initial configuration of the VM is coded as a shell script: https://github.com/susam/dotfiles/blob/main/linode.sh https://github.com/susam/dotfiles/blob/main/linode.sh * Project-specific or service-specific configuration is coded as individual Makefiles. Examples: https://github.com/susam/susam.net/blob/main/Makefile https://github.com/susam/susam.net/blob/main/Makefile and https://github.com/susam/mathb/blob/main/Makefile https://github.com/susam/mathb/blob/main/Makefile * I do not use containers. These websites have been running since several years before containers were popular. I have found that the initialization script and a Makefile have been sufficient for my needs so far. * I use Nginx too. Nginx serves the static files as well as functions as a reverse proxy when there are backend services involved. Indeed TLS termination is an important benefit it offers. Other benefits include rate limiting requests, configuring an allowlist for HTTP headers to protect the backend service, etc. * I have a little private playbook with a handful of commands like: curl LINK -o linode.sh && sh linode.sh git clone LINK && cd PROJECT && sudo make setup https * The `make` targets do whatever is necessary to set up the website. This includes installing tools like Nginx, certbot, sbcl, etc., setting up Nginx configuration, setting up certificates, etc. Once the `make` command completes, the website is live on the world wide web.

schemescape 3y ago
Which Common Lisp implementation do you use? If it’s SBCL, has memory usage been a problem? Edit: I see SBCL in one of your Makefiles. I use a VPS with 512 MB of RAM, but each SBCL instance uses roughly 100 MB of RAM, so I can only have a couple services at once. I’ve considered moving the lowest traffic services to CLISP, but it’s missing at least one feature I use (package—local nicknames).
- susam 3y ago
  Yes, I use SBCL. For static websites, the memory usage is not a problem because SBCL exits after generating the website. For long running services, it does consume about 100 MB of memory. For example, I have a service running right now with an uptime of 270 days. SBCL is currently consuming 108 MB of memory. This has not been a problem either because for low traffic websites like mine, this memory consumption size remains fairly stable. I have not found it to be varying much.
- jorams 3y ago
  SBCL needs a relatively large amount of memory to start with, but beyond that it doesn't require much. I run a few small services written in Common Lisp. Instead of running a separate process for every one of them I run a single SBCL process and run each service in a different thread. This has some downsides: Firstly they run in the same address space, so global state is shared and serious bugs can affect another service. Secondly they run as a single systemd service, so they're not easy to manage individually. Still I've found it to work quite nicely for things that are simple and don't really need attention.
  - schemescape 3y ago
    Thanks! That setup is actually my backup plan if I start to run out of memory. Maybe it’s my imagination but it seems like CL isn’t as suited to sharing code and read-only data pages across processes (e.g. in shared libraries). Or maybe there’s a solution I just haven’t found yet…

by susam 3y ago

schemescape 3y ago

Which Common Lisp implementation do you use? If it’s SBCL, has memory usage been a problem? Edit: I see SBCL in one of your Makefiles. I use a VPS with 512 MB of RAM, but each SBCL instance uses roughly 100 MB of RAM, so I can only have a couple services at once. I’ve considered moving the lowest traffic services to CLISP, but it’s missing at least one feature I use (package—local nicknames).

susam 3y ago
Yes, I use SBCL. For static websites, the memory usage is not a problem because SBCL exits after generating the website. For long running services, it does consume about 100 MB of memory. For example, I have a service running right now with an uptime of 270 days. SBCL is currently consuming 108 MB of memory. This has not been a problem either because for low traffic websites like mine, this memory consumption size remains fairly stable. I have not found it to be varying much.
jorams 3y ago
SBCL needs a relatively large amount of memory to start with, but beyond that it doesn't require much. I run a few small services written in Common Lisp. Instead of running a separate process for every one of them I run a single SBCL process and run each service in a different thread. This has some downsides: Firstly they run in the same address space, so global state is shared and serious bugs can affect another service. Secondly they run as a single systemd service, so they're not easy to manage individually. Still I've found it to work quite nicely for things that are simple and don't really need attention.
- schemescape 3y ago
  Thanks! That setup is actually my backup plan if I start to run out of memory. Maybe it’s my imagination but it seems like CL isn’t as suited to sharing code and read-only data pages across processes (e.g. in shared libraries). Or maybe there’s a solution I just haven’t found yet…