WordPress MU

I am sure this has been addressed before, but I am having trouble finding the answer that suits my specific question.
I have 1 dedicated server currently, and I am looking to set up a bunch of new blogs. Some are open for public posting, some for individual authors to write their own blogs. My questions is, what makes more sense from a server load perspective ?? Installing several different wordpress installations with separate mysql DB's ... or 1 install of wordpress MU to manage it all. I am not concerned about having 1 admin, or any of that ... just wondering which way will work best for performance on our server if I set up say 10 blogs.
Thanks,
Jesse

Depends. Do you want to upgrade one set of code or many?

Serious question there.

The other consideration to think about is how much access you want your endusers to have. If you want them to be able to edit everything, I'd learn towards regular wordpress installs. If you want to control stuff or otherwise don't want them worrying about it, I'd lean towards WPMu.

I wouldn't even worry about load. A lot of us are running wpmu within standard hosting accounts without issue although we usually get approval from our hosts first.

Hope this helps,
-drmike

"Depends. Do you want to upgrade one set of code or many?

Serious question there."

For "10" blogs, MU would be overkill.

I recently posted here about my multiple domain hack, which IMHO, would probably be a better fit from the sound of your situation.

1 file structure to maintain and upgrade, less load, no plugin compatibility issues, easier DB management too (overall).

I am sure I am not understanding something here, but what is the difference between the solution you are proposing and MU ? I have only 1 domain ... just a lot of blogs I am going to run on it, but your comment about less load is what I am curious about.
Thanks,
Jesse

You're going to get load (and probably the same amount of it) if you run one install or 10. The question you have to ask yourself is to compare the tradeoffs. With Mu, you get only one set of files to worry about but your end users have less options. With regular wordpress, your endusers have all the options that they need but yet you have to deal with ten sets of software with upgrades and plugins and the like.

"I am sure I am not understanding something here, but what is the difference between the solution you are proposing and MU ? I have only 1 domain ... just a lot of blogs I am going to run on it, but your comment about less load is what I am curious about.
Thanks,
Jesse"

-WP creates less load than MU. Yes.

The difference in my link I referenced, is that similar to MU, it uses the same file structure for all blogs. That's where the comparison stops.

Essentially, it's 10 installs of WP, but only using 1 set of files that need to be maintained.

Each blog can have its own DB (or tables in a DB if that's how you want to set it up), each blog has its own users, and the whole 9 yards just like it was WP.

Well, it is WP, the only difference is one set of files as I mentioned.

Having one domain is OK too, with only slight modification to the stristr check for what domain is being called. you could look for blog1.domain.tld, vice domain.tld for example.

So, then you can add whatever subdomains you want, as you need them, or even run a mix of domains and subdomains.

If all your tables are in the same DB, you could work up some special queries, and address different tables to mimic some of the MU things (like recent posts from all blogs or something), or whatever.

It seems like the your main concern is load and, if that is truly the case, if I were in your position in terms of need, I would use my link referenced above.

Then again, since you have your own box already, depending on what you already have on it and what the specs are, MU should be just fine on it.

If you already have half your resources or more in use from other sites on it, then I'd opt (again, if it were me) for the option in the link as well.

Would MU still run? Yes. However, it might be a bit sluggish since it really prefers to be the only "kid on the block" for optimal performance.