Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Nginx vs Litespeed vs Apache vs Cherokee vs Lighttpd vs IIS - Page 2
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Nginx vs Litespeed vs Apache vs Cherokee vs Lighttpd vs IIS

2

Comments

  • JacobHJacobH Member
    edited December 2012

    http://www.litespeedtech.com/litespeed-web-server-release-log.html still seems in development for me :)

    @eva2000 said: heavy PHP intensive sites and/or heavy mod_rewrite/htaccess support needed

    => Litespeed > Nginx/php-fpm

    everything else (particularly static file serving)

    => Nginx

    Agreed

  • GIANT_CRABGIANT_CRAB Member
    edited December 2012

    If you meant development as beta, you're wrong.
    If you meant development as constantly updating, you're correct.

    English is such as pain.

  • I think most of the LET community will favour the least cost approach anyway = nginx :)

  • joepie91joepie91 Member, Patron Provider

    @rm_ said: I tried to use Nginx briefly, but felt too awkward to set-up and configure, compared to Lighttpd. And it does not provide any benefit to justify the switch. (No, it's not faster than Lighttpd, of if it is, then not by much and I don't care).

    nginx is significantly faster (and lighter) than lighttpd on serving static files. The reason I prefer lighttpd is mostly because 1. it's far easier to configure and runs well out of the box, and 2. it seems to take a much saner (and lighter) approach to dealing with PHP and such.

  • I think that Litespeed is an overkill for LEB world and a solution for dedicated only.
    At the end if i need a solution for 1 million unique per month i choose what package (license server time ...) cost me less.

  • LazyZhuLazyZhu Member
    edited December 2012

    @rm_
    Nginx is much easier than lighttpd to develop modules, which is very important for people who want to extend functions as needs.
    By far, there already have many useful modules. For example, The HttpLuaModule embed the power of Lua into nginx, so you can call external C functions by luajit's FFI library.

    So Nginx +1.

  • IIS. It feels good to have a job.

  • @gubbyte said: IIS. It feels good to have a job.

    Damn Microsoft.

  • PHP web serving study from 2010
    http://www.saltwaterc.ro/wp-download/documents/PHP_web_serving_study.pdf
    2 years ago but real (for me)

    Lighttpd
    Nginx
    maybe hiawatha

  • sleddogsleddog Member
    edited December 2012

    @GIANT_CRAB said: Nginx is good at loading static pages.

    Litespeed is good at loading dynamic pages.
    Apache has the largest community.
    Cherokee is best at loading static and dynamic pages, however, its project has been abandoned. quite outdated. - https://github.com/cherokee/webserver/

    Which is the best and why?

    If by "dynamic pages" you mean PHP, then none of these webservers natively support it. They all depend on some form of (external) PHP implementation. So the question becomes: what is the best way to implement PHP? And secondarily, which web servers support it?

    The answer to the first part is easy: php-fpm. And more specifically, PHP 5.4 is significantly faster and leaner (less memory usage) than any preceding version.

    Regards to the second part: nginx supports php-fpm. Other webservers probably also support it, but I haven't looked.

  • joepie91joepie91 Member, Patron Provider

    @sleddog said: The answer to the first part is easy: php-fpm.

    I think you mean FastCGI. php-fpm is just a FastCGI process manager.

  • @joepie91 said: I think you mean FastCGI. php-fpm is just a FastCGI process manager.

    Most package managers will identify it as php-fpm or php5-fpm. Which is different in most cases from php-cgi. Confusion exists.

    Do you want to add something of value to the discussion, or just argue semantics? Yes, FPM = fast process manager.

  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    @GIANT_CRAB said: @pubcrawler said: Litespeed? Still under development?

    Not really, http://www.litespeedtech.com/overview.html

    Eh? LS is still developed:

    http://www.litespeedtech.com/litespeed-sapi-release-log.html

  • joepie91joepie91 Member, Patron Provider
    edited December 2012

    @sleddog said: Most package managers will identify it as php-fpm or php5-fpm. Which is different in most cases from php-cgi. Confusion exists.

    Do you want to add something of value to the discussion, or just argue semantics? Yes, FPM = fast process manager.

    Seeing as lighttpd by default uses FastCGI (just as fpm does) but without using fpm, this is sort of an important distinction to make.

    But go ahead, believe that it doesn't matter what words you use even if they are blatantly incorrect. After all, words and the associated meanings don't serve a purpose in modern language.

    EDIT: Oh, by the way, when you install PHP for use with lighttpd on Debian, you install php5-cgi, not php5-fpm.

  • My epic sauce setup:

    • nginx serving static files
    • apache 2.4 with latest stable PHP
    • when a static file was not found, nginx will reverse proxy to the apache which can then serve a PHP page or a 404 page.
  • @joepie91 : Why do you attempt to create an argument in seemingly every thread? Honestly it's beyond my understanding.

    If you wish to address the thread topic, and add something of value based on your experience, please do so.

    If you want to continue sniping at me, I'll just ignore you.

  • joepie91joepie91 Member, Patron Provider
    edited December 2012

    @sleddog said: @joepie91 : Why do you attempt to create an argument in seemingly every thread? Honestly it's beyond my understanding.

    If you wish to address the thread topic, and add something of value based on your experience, please do so.

    If you want to continue sniping at me, I'll just ignore you.

    You are the one causing the argument here. I just corrected something that wasn't correct in your post, without any further comments, to prevent others from getting incorrect information. You decided to complain about it and turn it into an argument. Don't try to shift the blame on me now.

    EDIT: You may also notice that I already posted my experiences earlier in this topic, not to mention that said correction is also a contribution to the thread. I'm really not quite sure what you're going on about.

  • Both of you. Stop. Now. Please.

  • @Divinite said: Both of you. Stop. Now. Please.

    I've stopped :) I tried to offer some advice regarding the original thread topic, then joe waded in with his criticisms. I have nothing more to add, as it's impossible to carry on a sane conversation when big joe enters the fray ;)

    Cheers.

  • @sleddog, not necessary. Please don't think I am stupid and can't see that you're trying to get the last word in. Just stop.

  • I'm surprised people have so much trouble configuring nginx, it's pretty straightforward to me...

  • Dude wtf, this is a nice thread, both of you please staph

  • I'll run nginx over anything else if I have a choice. It is fast and rock solid. That being said I will run Apache if its necessary or if a customer has a preference. I'll speed up Apache using nginx as a front end using proxy pass.

  • rm_rm_ IPv6 Advocate, Veteran
    edited December 2012

    @sleddog said: So the question becomes: what is the best way to implement PHP?

    The answer to the first part is easy: php-fpm.

    Most package managers will identify it as php-fpm or php5-fpm. Which is different in most cases from php-cgi.

    I use PHP with Lighttpd, but I never installed or configured anything called "FPM". So do you argue now that the way PHP is used by Lighttpd is inferior? Because it's not "FPM"? That would be just silly. Yes it is called FastCGI, and @joepie91 is completely right.

  • jcalebjcaleb Member
    edited December 2012

    @rm_ said: I tried to use Nginx briefly, and you expect me to know what "fastcgi_cache" is, or what it does? Well from the name I assume it caches fastcgi; there is ModCache in Lighttpd, there is also modules like XCache and APC in PHP.

    I think that's the one I'm looking for. Thanks!

    Without using Lighttpd, but just by reading, it seems much easier than nginx. Me working with nginx is so much headache

  • eva2000eva2000 Veteran
    edited December 2012

    @sleddog said: Regards to the second part: nginx supports php-fpm. Other webservers probably also support it, but I haven't looked.

    Litespeed web server LSAPI PHP http://www.litespeedtech.com/php-litespeed-sapi.html. LSAPI v6.0 in Litespeed 4.2.x series builds on performance http://blog.litespeedtech.com/2012/09/11/lsws-4-2-introduces-php-suexec-daemon-mode/

    For Nginx definitely best way is with php-fpm

  • LSAPI is actually the fastest way to interface with external PHP, I so want a mod_lsapi for nginx =/

  • I like nginx + php-fpm + xcache. It can be a little tricky setting up the config files at first, but there's enough people using it now that there are sample configurations for a lot of stuff readily available, so that helps.

  • If there are dynamic pages to deliver I will go with lighttpd (and FastCGI).

    For static content: gatling

  • Is there any installation script like the ones that exist for nginx+php-fpm+MySQL (Example: http://freevps.us/thread-1434.html) for lighttpd+php+MySQL that offer a bit of automation and pre-configuration already? Preferably for CentOS while Debian would also be okay...

Sign In or Register to comment.