Share jquery slider across many sites

I bought a 3rd party jquery slider and I would like to put it on approximately 1,000 sites hosted on a single web server (LAMP).  What are the pros and cons of the following methods:

- Distribute copies of the .js and all related graphics and files to each of 1,000 sites.  So each site is going to have a folder public_html/slidercode/ with around 15 files in it.  

- Put the .js and related graphics/files in a shared location below public_html, such as /usr/shared, then each site would reference the shared .js file.

- Put the .js and realted graphics/files in a shared location above public_html, such as /home/somesharedsite/public_html/

Are any of these security risks?  (all files are .js or .png)  
Will sharing the files cause any type of performance hit?
Are there any other considerations I should be aware of?
Who is Participating?

[Product update] Infrastructure Analysis Tool is now available with Business Accounts.Learn More

I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

Alexandre SimõesManager / Technology SpecialistCommented:
This is actually a good practice.
In my case I use it often to take load off my application servers.
IIS or JBoss have more important things to do than deliver static content, so when I see  fit, I add an Apache or NGinx server to the mix that it's the sole responsible for delivering that static content (js, css, images).

There are no security risks whatsoever. It's just that instead of requesting everything from one server you spread the load among multiple.
You can also use this as an intermediate step towards a CDN.

Another advantage of this is when the same user might actually access multiple of those sites. Like a corporate set of sites or something like that. In that case, delivering the static content from a single location will allow the browser to cache those resources between websites.

As other considerations, you might need to consider the assets versioning properly.
As you'll be using this content in 1000 sites, if you ever need to write something specific for a subset, of need to update some css, js or image files, that will affect all of them.
This can be good and bad depending on what you're actually doing.

jeff_zuckerAuthor Commented:
>>This is actually a good practice.

Which option is good practice?  The 3rd one?  I just want to make sure having 1,000 sites access the same files won't impact performance.
Alexandre SimõesManager / Technology SpecialistCommented:
Yes, the 3rd one, sorry :)

1000 requests to a small set of static files is not a big deal.
And as they are static, the browser will cache them anyway.

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Web Development

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.