Apache vs nginx vs lighttpd (And Cherokee!)

[Lifetalk]

^^ according to litespeed staff LSWS is far better than nginx, so i just wanted to see that in action

http://www.litespeedtech.com/support/forum/showthread.php?t=2429

Lol Litespeed Staff. They're staff; they'd say anything and everything without much basis to it if it helped them sell their product.

[eLight]

Thanks to Lifetalk for the Cherokee benchmarks

[DLow]

I agree with eLight totally when it comes to lsws (Litespeed web server)

nGinx owned Litespeed when i ran my bench marks last year i think i have also had talks with Lifetalk months ago about how crappy litespeed was compared to nGinx ?

[Lifetalk]

I'd personally always stay away from a paid webserver software. Nginx (did you guys know it was initially meant to be called EngineX ?) outperforms LSWS; all the time. There's no reason to pay for a webserver if a free alternative performs better. Only reason I see is that it has a few performance gains over Apache, and allows you to retain Apache's .htaccess mod_rewrite syntax.

Oh and Cherokee does not have rewrite support in the traditional way. You can't just define rewrite rules in some file. There's a sophisticated way of doing them, although once you get used to them - they're pretty easy.

[eLight]

Agreed there. Looks like nginx is the winner for static files!

[okone]

I'd personally always stay away from a paid webserver software. Nginx (did you guys know it was initially meant to be called EngineX ?)

Umm, its full name IS EngineX...nginx is an abbreviation.

[eLight]

I've always pronounced it "en jinx". Though I do remember reading somewhere that it's meant to be pronounced engineX.

[sloddl]

i get better stats with lighttpd then with nginx on my site/server. but maybe that this is because i have most PHP and not total static (cached html) pages.

+ less errors, but nginx will fix the errors too in the future i think, it's still new. i'm mean new compared to apache and lighttpd. but it's not that new in days/years. :>

[okone]

I've always pronounced it "en jinx". Though I do remember reading somewhere that it's meant to be pronounced engineX.

So do I, even though its not correct, I think most people do.

N-gin-X is how its meant to be though.

i get better stats with lighttpd then with nginx on my site/server. but maybe that this is because i have most PHP and not total static (cached html) pages.

That shouldn't matter. Both nginx and lighttpd proxy to a 3rd party php interpreter like fpm to handle php, so technically that shouldn't make a difference.

I'd personally go with nginx, but thats because its actively developed and they have very helpful/knowledgeable support staff.

[Lifetalk]

Umm, its full name IS EngineX...nginx is an abbreviation.

I stand corrected, thank you.

I've always pronounced it "en jinx". Though I do remember reading somewhere that it's meant to be pronounced engineX.

Yep, I suppose that's how the majority pronounce it as