Apache -vs- nginx -vs- lighttpd?

[Blandt]

Cherokee looks indeed like a very viable alternative. Nice feature set, good performance, easy configuration - it's all there. What it needs is to prove its reliability and robustness in a production environment. The last version I tested (though quite a while ago, so lots of things might have changed) had some issues with (simulated) high load scenarios.

oh indeedy ... loads of things have been added for the novice ... it even tells you what library is missing to complete the install and gives you the command to copy paste on the terminal .. sweet for the novice or the overworked

 

[DregondRahl]

Very simple 2 rules :

click on your vServers tab, then your domain (vserver) >>> select behavior tab >>> click Rule Management >>> click the plus sign to ad a rule >>> select Redirection >>> Click Add new Regex
Select Internal redirection
On the Regular Expression text box enter : /?(.*)
on the Substitution Text box enter : /index.php?/$1 (assuming xenforo is located at the root, if it's in a subfolder like community then >>> /community/index.php?/$1 )

Next

click + to add another rule select directory and enter : (data|js|styles|install)
on the handler screen select : HTTP Error
and on the HTTP Error drop down menu select : 403 forbidden



Hit save, >> Graceful Restart


I will take screen shots / or record a video when I get the chance

Settings up my test VPS with Cherokee now and will see how it performs =]

 

[Adam Howard]

Settings up my test VPS with Cherokee now and will see how it performs =]

Any word on how Cherokee is working for you?

 

[DregondRahl]

Any word on how Cherokee is working for you?

I did some testing, its pretty close to nginx, just uses alittle more memory than nginx. I don't think there will be much difference with dynamic content, since nginx and lighttpd and cherokee all use FastCGI or UNIX sockets. So on that side its pretty much the same. Static files seems to be a good match to nginx.

For me I prefer nginx over Cherokee due to experience with it. Cherokee however would be a great replacement for people more used to control panels, and to to configure without editing files directly. The best way to learn if its what you would prefer using is to try it out yourself and see if it fits to your needs. Its a very easy install through the python method. In my opinion it would be worth looking into, but do know like lighttpd the FastCGI children are static unlike PHP-FPM with dynamic generation, so be sure to test with a reasonable amount of php-cgi processes.

I wonder how Cherokee will perform with Varnish and if it would effect dynamic content handling like it does with Apache.

 

[Blandt]

I did some testing, its pretty close to nginx, just uses alittle more memory than nginx. I don't think there will be much difference with dynamic content, since nginx and lighttpd and cherokee all use FastCGI or UNIX sockets. So on that side its pretty much the same. Static files seems to be a good match to nginx.

For me I prefer nginx over Cherokee due to experience with it. Cherokee however would be a great replacement for people more used to control panels, and to to configure without editing files directly. The best way to learn if its what you would prefer using is to try it out yourself and see if it fits to your needs. Its a very easy install through the python method. In my opinion it would be worth looking into, but do know like lighttpd the FastCGI children are static unlike PHP-FPM with dynamic generation, so be sure to test with a reasonable amount of php-cgi processes.

I wonder how Cherokee will perform with Varnish and if it would effect dynamic content handling like it does with Apache.

why did you not set php5-fpm with cherokee ? it works

 

[DregondRahl]

why did you not set php5-fpm with cherokee ? it works

ill give it a try, im testing out some static files right now, getting some strange results with cherokee slower than nginx =/ it might be my config. If you can do a benchmark on this test file

wget http://vbtechsupport.com/litespeed/benchmarks/jan23/test.txt

just wget it and run for:

ab -k -c 1000 -n 1000

ab -k -c 1000 -n 100000

On my VPS I get these results for ab -k -c 1000 -n 1000

Document Path:          /test.txt
Document Length:        40316 bytes

Concurrency Level:      1000
Time taken for tests:   0.415 seconds
Complete requests:      1000
Failed requests:        0
Write errors:           0
Keep-Alive requests:    796
Total transferred:      40547248 bytes
HTML transferred:       40316000 bytes
Requests per second:    2410.29 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request:       414.887 [ms] (mean)
Time per request:       0.415 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate:          95440.26 [Kbytes/sec] received

 

[Blandt]

ill give it a try, im testing out some static files right now, getting some strange results with cherokee slower than nginx
[/CODE]

Have you set up the compression ??

set up a static rule with gzip enabled

 

[DregondRahl]

Have you set up the compression ??

yup, its setup gzip compression, level 6 so it matches my nginx config. localhost benchmarks show a significant difference (which doesn't really matter), but across each other Cherokee has around 30rps advantage only for higher benchmark 10000+ requests after i modified the file descriptors value and timeout.

Seems Cherokee is a good runner for nginx, only significant difference is thier memory usage during that tests, nginx was around 2 -3 % while Cherokee used around 7%

 

[JACKST]

I am having problem with lighttpd, push notifications are not working, I installed apache and everything worked, but when I switched back to lighttpd, option for notifications is blocked and I am still able to receive notifications on old enabled notifications on some devices, but if I try to clear cookies and check preferences it is blocked. Lighttpd seems to be interfering with browser cookies or something else.

 

[Paul B]

If you require support, you will need to associate your forum user name with your account and post in the relevant forum.