I have asked, or hinted at, other variants of the same question, but here again -- I am now developing and deploying many Dancer apps. Have been experimenting with, and am quite happy with Starman serving them hiding behind Apache2 proxies. My home grown, amateurish web_ctl [https://github.com/punkish/web_ctl] helps me manage them as well. However, with every app, I am starting an additional 10 Starman processes, so now already I have about 60 Starman processes running on my computer. 1. Why 10? I once tried 2 Starman processes for a very, very low traffic app, and found it coughing and sputtering, but surely, 10 is too many, isn't it? 2. Why not Apache2 with mod_perl or fastcgi or mod_psgi? Apache seems to launch 5-10 "children," but no matter how many apps are being served by it, that number of child processes seems to hover around that number. It doesn't get to n * 10 for Starman? The Starman approach does have one clear advantage -- each app can be turned off or on separately without having to restart Apache entirely. I want to get the crowd-wisdom on serving, say 50 different Dancer apps on the same computer. The apps will range from very, very low traffic to moderate traffic. However, all the apps will be data-intensive, in that, even if the number of user-hits on the server are few per hour, each hit does a fair bit of database work and sends back largish amounts of data. Data may be on the same or a different server -- that part is out of the scope for this thread. Many thanks in advance. Puneet.