https://www.nginx.com/blog/nginx-vs-apache-our-view/
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:35 AM, André Warnier <a...@ice-sa.com> wrote: > On 13.06.2016 14:09, John Dunlap wrote: > >> We use Amazon Cloudfront for serving all of our static content. The only >> thing we load from Apache is an index.html file to bootstrap into >> Ember.js. >> In our experience, Cloudfront delivers static content to the browser 5-6 >> times faster than our servers can. So, practically all of our requests >> serve dynamic content. >> >> Also, I didn't mean that Apache is slow or that it isn't a great web >> server >> per say but rather that, due to its single thread per request model, >> > > does anyone do better ? multiple threads per request ? some new kind of > parallel quantum computing ? > Sorry, I guess you meant something else, but in this case maybe it helps > to be precise ? > (or, I am willng to learn if there is a model which I don't know yet) > > > it > >> cannot accept as many concurrent connections as Nginx can. Now, as I have >> not had time to experiment with Perl+Nginx, I cannot speak to whether or >> not there are offsetting performance penalties incurred by FCGI. I can >> tell >> you that, at some point, I'm going to experiment with it. >> >> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 7:16 AM, James Smith <j...@sanger.ac.uk> wrote: >> >> All our experiences at work with nginx/psgi & nginx/fastcgi are poor - it >>> is very good if any of your queries takes any length of time and/or the >>> fastcgi/psgi requests are requested a lot relative to the static content >>> served by nginx then there are quite significant error/performance >>> issues.... In our case the only static files are mainly images.. The rest >>> of the content is dynamic - whether it is server cached pages or real >>> dynamic content... >>> >>> We have a load balancing proxy in-front of our apaches so we can fork >>> content elsewhere that is to be served fast! We don't because Apache >>> itself >>> is fast enough! Admittedly we have taken a lot of care to reduce the >>> overall number of requests to a minimum (page, 1 CSS, 1 JS + a handful of >>> images per page) >>> >>> The hacks we would have to do in PSGI/FastCGI to get these features would >>> probably be negated by the move away from Apache.... >>> >>> Apache is fast enough if you use it properly!! >>> >>> On 6/13/2016 11:58 AM, John Dunlap wrote: >>> >>> Speaking as someone would like to migrate to Nginx, at some point, the >>> big >>> advantage of Nginx really has nothing to do with mod_perl. It has to do >>> with Apache. The way Apache processes requests is fundamentally slower >>> than >>> Nginx and, consequently, Nginx scales better. >>> On Jun 13, 2016 6:54 AM, "James Smith" <j...@sanger.ac.uk> wrote: >>> >>> Just posted: >>>> >>>> mod_perl is a much better framework that PSGI, FastCGI IF you make use >>>> of >>>> the integration of perl into all the stages of apache (you can hook into >>>> about 15 different stages in the Apache life cycle. >>>> >>>> We make of extensive use of the input, output filters, AAA-layers, clean >>>> up, logging, server startup, etc processes then it is one of the best >>>> web >>>> frameworks you can use. >>>> >>>> We have sites where content is produced by either being static, >>>> mod_perl, >>>> php, and java (or proxied back from some ancient CGI software) all >>>> processed by the same mod_perl code in the output filter to look the >>>> same! >>>> or different if was using a different site! >>>> >>>> If all you are interested in is wrapping CGI scripts in a cached >>>> interpreter for performance then yes you can move to one of these other >>>> frameworks - but then you have already spent lots of time and effort >>>> implementing the features that are virtually free with apache/mod_perl! >>>> >>>> On 6/11/2016 7:11 PM, Vincent Veyron wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> See this post on reddit : >>>> >>>> https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxadmin/comments/4n5seo/apache_22_mod_perl_to_nginx/ >>>> >>>> Please help set the record straight. Ancient technology WTF? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is operated by Genome Research >>>> Limited, a charity registered in England with number 1021457 and a >>>> company >>>> registered in England with number 2742969, whose registered office is >>>> 215 >>>> Euston Road, London, NW1 2BE. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is operated by Genome Research >>> Limited, a charity registered in England with number 1021457 and a >>> company >>> registered in England with number 2742969, whose registered office is 215 >>> Euston Road, London, NW1 2BE. >>> >>> >> >> >> > -- John Dunlap *CTO | Lariat * *Direct:* *j...@lariat.co <j...@lariat.co>* *Customer Service:* 877.268.6667 supp...@lariat.co
