Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 07:30:30 +0100 From: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> To: Kaya Saman <SamanKaya@netscape.net> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Torrentflux and Zabbix Apache Include files?? Message-ID: <4C0C9206.5050000@infracaninophile.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <4C0C1774.8000802@netscape.net> References: <4C0B8B9B.5080206@netscape.net> <4C0BAE9A.7060503@netscape.net> <4C0C06DF.7070607@infracaninophile.co.uk> <4C0C1774.8000802@netscape.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/06/2010 22:47:32, Kaya Saman wrote:
> Just in response to the "there are other better web servers then Apache"
> comment!
>
> What are they??
I carefully didn't say "better" -- I said "faster." You've mentioned
(sort of) one already: lighttpd. My personal favourite is nginx. There
are almost certainly several others, but those are the leading two
examples. In a straight comparison on the same hardware serving up
static content either of these will outperform Apache delivering more
content with lower latency and lower system load.
What they aren't especially good at is dealing with a complicated setup
involving all sorts of URL rewriting, redirection etc. They also
generally need to use things like fCGI to let them serve dynamic
content, which is a whole different ball-game compared to the Apache
loadable module concept, and may not work at all for some web apps.
Cheers,
Matthew
- --
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
JID: matthew@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAkwMkgYACgkQ8Mjk52CukIz8tgCaAhTsrgIqznO6IXM5zVjk2SL7
UdoAn3Np/txGGZrC/aaQA7EJFKB6/xAr
=FUoA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C0C9206.5050000>