From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 7 06:30:34 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE5221065673 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 06:30:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) Received: from smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (gate6.infracaninophile.co.uk [IPv6:2001:8b0:151:1::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 620B98FC12 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 06:30:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from seedling.black-earth.co.uk (seedling.black-earth.co.uk [81.187.76.163]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o576UUBT092267 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 7 Jun 2010 07:30:31 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) Message-ID: <4C0C9206.5050000@infracaninophile.co.uk> Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 07:30:30 +0100 From: Matthew Seaman Organization: Infracaninophile User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kaya Saman References: <4C0B8B9B.5080206@netscape.net> <4C0BAE9A.7060503@netscape.net> <4C0C06DF.7070607@infracaninophile.co.uk> <4C0C1774.8000802@netscape.net> In-Reply-To: <4C0C1774.8000802@netscape.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.1 at lucid-nonsense.infracaninophile.co.uk X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,DKIM_ADSP_ALL, SPF_FAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on lucid-nonsense.infracaninophile.co.uk Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Torrentflux and Zabbix Apache Include files?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 06:30:35 -0000 -----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-----