Apache vs lighttpd

talk random
1

Okay so I have to set up yet another VPS server for yet another site (Sometimes I feel like some sort of weird linux monkey instead of the ‘supposed’ actionscript developer that I feel like).

Either way, I’m most likely going to go with Red Hat but I was wondering about HTTP server. Admittedly I’ve ever only been working with Apache so I feel pretty biased, but I’ve heard a lot of good things about lighttpd. Does anyone have any personal experience that they feel like sharing?

Also curious about Nginx since that seems to be a pretty sawheet one as well…

Thanks guys, always greatly appreciated. I admit to feeling guilty for posting these threads, shamelessly exploiting other peoples knowledge, but I guess that’s what forums are really about :stuck_out_tongue:

2

I’m curious too. And I want to throw Litespeed in here as well (if you haven’t heard of it sekasi). It’s basically a light weight version of Apache that uses 20x less memory and is compatible with like 80% of the Apache modules out there.

3

Cool, thanks for the heads up.

Seems there’s few server side people here so I’ll do some digging and post what I come up with.

4

In very very short words, YouTube uses lighttpd. :slight_smile:

5

Well yes, I know, but that alone is not exactly what I wanted to know. I was looking for some more hard core in depths comparisons preferably with bench reports drool :slight_smile:

Especially curious about Nginx tbh, it has almost as many reported users as lighttpd but noone seems to know anything about it. Looks blazing fast too.

6

I run Lighttpd on my Joyent Shared Accelerator, and it’s pretty nice. It’s much easier to configure and feels more dynamic than Apache.

I can’t say much more than just that. I found it easier to use and more fun to configure.

7

Litespeed vs everything else. Very compelling (and that’s why I chose it) but I’m dubious of the integrity of this report.

// edit, actually you know what, the free version of Litespeed is actually slower than Lighttpd :lol:. But it’s still compatible with stuff like .htaccess, multiple sites/domains (virtual hosts) per server. It’s such a mess with Lighttpd…

8

I always thought stuff like virtual hosts was a lot simpler on Lighttpd. I guess it’s just a matter of personal opinion, but the feel of its config was much easier for me.

Edit: Err, in comparison to Apache. I haven’t used Litespeed.

9

I prefer nginx. It’s got a very small footprint compared to apache, I find it very easy to configure and is fast as hell for serving static content.

AFIK nginx and lighttpd are very similar in performance both have pro’s and cons.

http://www.joeandmotorboat.com/2008/02/28/apache-vs-nginx-web-server-performance-deathmatch/

10

I read that after I saw your hint up there, have to say that the same thought struck me :x

Not having to relearn a new language for mod_rewrite and htaccess obviously is a big plus for me, and after some research I have to say that Nginx looks way cooler than lighttpd just because of the sheer minimal impact it has on the server.

Think I’m gonna try both Litespeed and Nginx today. That’ll be my saturday. Oh joy. My wife will love it.

not. :stuck_out_tongue: