Nginx, Lighttpd, zeus, or lightspeed ? What are you using ?

Discussion in 'Servers and Control Panels' started by Adam H, Aug 29, 2011.

  1. Adam H

    Adam H Think before you speak.

    1,473
    617
    +2,034
    What are you using from these on your server : Nginz, Lighttpd , zeus or lightspeed

    And what caching system are you running ? Xcache , Memcache , e-accelerator , other ?

    Im currently running Nginx and Xcache but looking for other peoples opinions on what is the best combination. Ive read most places that alot of companies including wordpress.com have switched from lightspeed to nginx
     
  2. Judge Dredd

    Judge Dredd Bayerische Motoren Werke

    3,168
    452
    +180
    LiteSpeed is the fastest of the four. But to use it to full capacity, you need to buy a license :(

    Unfortunately, I am using Apache instead of LiteSpeed with I believe e-Accelerator (could be wrong).

    Not that Apache is bad, I just prefer LiteSpeed.
     
  3. Adam H

    Adam H Think before you speak.

    1,473
    617
    +2,034
    I must admit lightspeed was the only one that i was considering using as ive used it in the past, Im curious to know why some large companies have moved from lightspeed though to apache nginx unless it is just the cost.
     
  4. Panupat

    Panupat Habitué

    1,561
    342
    +86
    Still on Apache here. I'm no guru, and Apache happens to work out of the box with most software :)
     
  5. BHH

    BHH Enthusiast

    196
    78
    +3
    nginx is a beast, the only problem with it are the rewrite rules. Though they can be converted to nginx format.
     
  6. eva2000

    eva2000 Habitué

    1,211
    837
    +284
    Live servers
    • 1 server using Litespeed web server + Varnish cache + Xcache + Memcached
    • 1 server using Nginx + Xcache + Memcached
    • 1 server using Apache + Unixy Varnish cache + Xcache + Memcached

    Local virtualized test servers
    • Litespeed web server + Litespeed cache/Varnish Cache + Xcache + Memcached
    • Nginx + APC + Memcached
    • Apache + Xcache + Memcached

    Litespeed is my first preference for very busy, large concurrent user sites as it scales the best for both static and more so for php loads. For static files only Nginx is okay although it's weakness comapred to Litespeed is for php loads. But Nginx is fine for most folks at lower traffic levels, until you starting getting alot of php load and alot of 502 bad gateway errors and you have exhausted all php-fpm/php tuning tweaks, then next up is either moving to Litespeed web server or as most Nginx folks do start adding additional web servers to just spread the php end load.

    My thoughts posted on my personal blog at http://vbtechsupport.com/33/

    Still messing around with Nginx for test environments with my modified Centmin install script
     
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2011
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. Adam H

    Adam H Think before you speak.

    1,473
    617
    +2,034
    Eva , Great reply thank you. Ive read your blog post also as i was considering using Varnish.

    Although im still very unclear what would be best for my server, I run not only vb forums but a number of wordpress blogs from my server on the same and on different cpanels.

    I also run such things as vbseo, what would be your recommendation ? nginx or varnish ? im assuming you wouldnt need xcache installed ?

    Im still learning all this server stuff so its not a strong point of mine.

    EDIT , I should probably add the problem ive been facing. Ive been getting extremely high server loads.........again at peak times, the sites are very much hit like hell for 4 hour bursts on some days ( football related ) which basically brings the server down. Today we are moving to a new server but im just looking to get it optimised as much as possible because tomorrow will be transfer deadline day and normally that knocks every server in our niche down lol . 90% of the time the server manages perfectly fine, just 2 days a week and it goes mental and everything dies.
     
  8. Lochie

    Lochie TAZ Enthusiast

    465
    242
    +41
    Apache still seems to me to be the simplest solution. I still use it on the servers, and test environments I use today.
     
  9. eva2000

    eva2000 Habitué

    1,211
    837
    +284
    varnish cache isn't a web server but web accelerator which sits in front of the web server - either litespeed, nginx or apache.

    I mainly run vBulletin and wordpress scripts on my servers. But for ease of use and scalability i lean towards Litespeed web server most of the times for busier sites.

    Xcache, APC and eaccelerator are php opcode caching tools which help for php end performance so yes you need to use one of the (exclusively) for php caching.

    Apache and Litespeed i lean to xcache. For Nginx lean to APC
     
  10. Adam H

    Adam H Think before you speak.

    1,473
    617
    +2,034
    Ah i get it , So have you ever used nginx with varnish in comparison to my current setup with nginx and xcache ? would there be in improvement from CPU usage point ?
     
  11. eva2000

    eva2000 Habitué

    1,211
    837
    +284
    varnish cache and xcache do different things, proper comparison would be

    in terms of php opcode caching

    apache* + xcache (php opcode cache)
    vs
    apache* + apc (php opcode cache)
    vs
    apache* + eaccelerator (php opcode cache)

    * switch out apache for nginx or litespeed web server


    in terms of web acceleration

    apache + varnish
    vs
    nginx + varnish
    vs
    litespeed web server + varnish
    vs
    nginx + nginx fastcgi_cache
    vs
    litespeed web server + litespeed cache

    But no i haven't tried nginx + varnish cache - would be the most time consuming combination of them all as it's quite alot of admin work to do with nginx configuration/htaccess/rewrite customisation + varnish vcl rule sets each script you load on your server.
     
    • Informative! Informative! x 1
  12. Adam H

    Adam H Think before you speak.

    1,473
    617
    +2,034
    Ok thanks for the explanation, i think ill stay away from doing varnish and nginx then lol
     
  13. eva2000

    eva2000 Habitué

    1,211
    837
    +284
    Yeah the progression i usually see from working with clients

    from basic to more advance (best scalability and performance) is as follows

    1. apache web server standalone (basic)
    2. apache + nginx as reverse proxy for static files only
    3. nginx standalone for static and php files
    4. nginx + nginx fastcgi_cache for php-fpm caching (not much success in getting this to work although Marcus/magmf on vB forums has posted a working example for vB script at least)
    5. litespeed web server (advanced)

    past few months Varnish cache has been getting more publicity and awareness so if you can get varnish vcl rule set right for your scripts it can come out on top paired with any web server but non-cached varnish hits which hit the backend web server would be the limiting aspect and then the rank for best would be

    litespeed + varnish > nginx + varnish > apache + varnish

    While varnish is nice, i still come across some php/mysql scripts which aren't working well with varnish - could be my varnish vcl-foo skills are not good enough but still learning :)

    Ultimately, for most folks litespeed web server + xcache (if using LSAPI PHP in non-suexec mode) or eaccelerator in disk cache mode (if using LSAPI PHP in suexec mode which is the litespeed default LSAPI PHP configuration).
     
  14. marsd

    marsd Neophyte

    4
    1
    +0
    From trial and error for a client with the need to support 2-300 online users at the same time running on an underpowered server (1ghz, 1gb ram), I've managed to strike a balance with varnish on apache2 running eaccelerator, memcached and mod_pagespeed.
     
  15. xenLiam

    xenLiam Adherent

    386
    95
    +29
    I use NginX for my forum, it provides an optimal performance. Although Apache works fine in some cases, especially for rewrite rules. I'm just glad xenForo has a rewrite rule for NginX.
     
  16. Milo

    Milo Aspirant

    11
    3
    +1
    I'm still running Apache but all of the load balancing and caching is handled by Cisco hardware on the frontend.

    I have been looking into Nginx simply because I like the concept of a server that doesn't spawn threads to handle requests. Even though I have the sufficient hardware and bandwidth to handle peak traffic, I do get annoyed with having to restart Apache to kill off zombie processes caused by poorly coded bots and scrapers.
     
  17. IcEWoLF

    IcEWoLF Habitué

    1,239
    217
    +266
    I run Unixy cPanel Varnish + Xcache + Memcached, works great.
     
  18. IcEWoLF

    IcEWoLF Habitué

    1,239
    217
    +266
    Update #2:
    I am running Litespeed + cPanel Varnish + xcache.
    Also disabled Innodb. (Disable InnoDB (skip-innodb in /etc/my.cnf)

    I am 100% MyISAM.

    My loading time use to be be average 10 - 6.
    Now it's down to 7 and 4.

    Current VPS server setup Quad Core Xeon, 2 GB RAM, CentOS5.

    See test results:
    http://www.webpagetest.org/result/111210_YR_2FHPF/
    http://www.webpagetest.org/result/111210_JW_2FHPH/

    I also added Edgecast CDN and also did some deep CDN implementations with vBulletin:
    http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/vbulletin-cdn-content-delivery-network-configuration.html

    Down the road the last thing I want to do is hire someone to make sure my server and everything is fully secured.
    I am looking to also add vboptimise pro soon too.

    BTW I do want to take this time to thank eva2000 for helping me and also for having an awesome website like http://vbtechsupport.com/

    This threads helped me a lot optimising my website to the fullest:
    http://vbtechsupport.com/290/
    http://vbtechsupport.com/33/
     
  19. IcEWoLF

    IcEWoLF Habitué

    1,239
    217
    +266
    Keep in mind I am also running a very graphic intese website, so the performance could be much higher if I ran default vBulletin skin or a lighter style.

    HTML5 anyone?
     
  20. eva2000

    eva2000 Habitué

    1,211
    837
    +284
    Glad my blog was helpful :)

    Great to see another Litespeed web server + Varnish cache combination in use. Been using it myself on one server for past 9+ months. Only difference is I'm using straight Varnish cache instead of Unixy Varnish plugin. So Unixy Varnish plugin worked out of the box for you with Litespeed/WHM ?

    How's bandwidth consumption and cost for Edgecast CDN considering your site is graphically intensive ? I know globally Edgecast CDN is faster, but for me in Australia not seeing that much of a difference compared to much cheaper MaxCDN i use - benchmarks http://vbtechsupport.com/1419/
     
Verification:
Draft saved Draft deleted