Re: Light HTTP servers.
Hi, On Sun, 20.07.2008 at 21:03:03 +0200, Marc Balmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Henning Brauer wrote: lighttpd. can it do reverse proxying, as needed for zope? in theory, it can, but I didn't try. My experience from running some low-traffic sites with both nginx and lighttpd is that nginx is by far easier to handle, more robust, and also more flexible in its configuration, and I hope to get rid of lighttpd asap (eg. my bugs would linger for months, or longer). The only point where lighttpd imho shines, sort of, is easier launching of internal FastCGI servers. Do you have any problems running nginx as a reverse proxy for Zope? We do it, and it gives us less trouble than the built-in Apache, I must say (even ignoring the system load). Kind regards, --Toni++
Re: Light HTTP servers.
Le Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 11:29:42AM +0200, Toni Mueller ecrivait : My experience from running some low-traffic sites with both nginx and lighttpd is that nginx is by far easier to handle, more robust, and also more flexible in its configuration, and I hope to get rid of lighttpd asap (eg. my bugs would linger for months, or longer). The only point where lighttpd imho shines, sort of, is easier launching of internal FastCGI servers. With low-traffic sites, there's not much difference between lighty and nginx, both are quite stable and they can serve a lot of static content without any CPU hit, even on a Soekris box. When it comes to the configuration, you can achieve the same results with both, but indeed nginx configuration files are usually cleaner. The lighty development status is a bit messy (see the lighty blog), while nginx development is clear and very active. Sure, lighty can start fastcgi servers, but on sites with medium traffic, php-fpm blows lighty's fastcgi servers. Switching from lighty (1.5) to nginx + php-fpm with GOTO for the Zend VM reduced the average time to serve pages of a busy vbulletin board down to a factor of 4. I never went back to lighty since. By the way, is anyone working on adding php-fpm to the php port? The patch requires some tweaks in order to properly merge and compile, but it's really worth it especially with nginx. Do you have any problems running nginx as a reverse proxy for Zope? We do it, and it gives us less trouble than the built-in Apache, I must say (even ignoring the system load). Kind regards, --Toni++ -- Frank Denis - j [at] pureftpd.org - http://00f.net - http://www.cotery.com
Re: Light HTTP servers.
On 2008-07-20, Marc Balmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Henning Brauer wrote: lighttpd. can it do reverse proxying, as needed for zope? it definitely can in 1.5, I'm not sure about the in-tree version but I think it's likely.
Re: Light HTTP servers.
* Stuart Henderson wrote: On 2008-07-20, Marc Balmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Henning Brauer wrote: lighttpd. can it do reverse proxying, as needed for zope? it definitely can in 1.5, I'm not sure about the in-tree version but I think it's likely. nice. btw, there is also a light http server called nostromo, developed by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Light HTTP servers.
nice. btw, there is also a light http server called nostromo, developed by [EMAIL PROTECTED] That's nhttpd, didn't you rtfm? The monkeys will eat you alive if you didn't (beats masturbating the whole day). -- Nuno MagalhC#es
Re: Light HTTP servers.
Nuno, I would highly suggest looking into Nginx. It is easy to build from source and runs efficiently, using little memory or CPU time. Even though it is a light web server compared to Apache, Nginx is able to handle high traffic loads. The WordPress blogging system recently converted all of its load balancers to Nginx, using the upstream hash module to serve 8-9 thousand requests per second. Unlike lighttpd, the author is actively developing Nginx and the community is constantly building add on modules. Finally, you can easily secure Nginx to better protect your machine from abusive clients. Nginx web server how to https://calomel.org/nginx.html -- Calomel @ https://calomel.org Open Source Research and Reference On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 03:14:40PM +0100, Nuno Magalh??es wrote: I have an old Compaq Armada 1500c with 32MB of RAM i want to use as a webserver. Having it support PHP and mySQL would be fun since i intend to use both. The same machine has sshd running and might also become a print-server for a parallel Epson Stylus Color 740 if i can decide on the print server (apparently either cups or lpd, whichever's lighter). I haven't fiddled with it a whole lot, it's mostly just on and showing top through ssh. Right now its memory line is this: Memory: Real: 7200K/20M act/tot Free: 3944K Swap: 0K/66M used/tot with its most cpu-intensive process being sendmail. I have no mailserver, what's that for? So, big servers like Apache are kind of out of the question. From the package list i found Bozotic, lighttpd, nginx, p5-HTTP-Server-Simple and thttpd. Of those, nginx caught my eye and while searching i came across cherokee-project.com, Hiawatha (hiawatha.leisink.org) and also shttpd.sourceforge.net Is anyone using any of these or a lightweight httpd in general? I don't mean small as in d116.com/ace/ nor are my resources as low as d116.com/spud/ but useful input would be welcome. Ya know, the constructive criticism type. TIA -- Nuno MagalhC#es
Re: Light HTTP servers.
There is also a package of the stable version of nginx. If you need features from the development version or want different modules than the package then build from source. But why not use the existing port/package if it suits you? As for which light http server, it might be best to try out several and see which works best for you, Nuno. I think any of them will work, but which works best for *your* needs on *that* machine is the real question. On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 11:12:22AM -0400, Calomel wrote: Nuno, I would highly suggest looking into Nginx. It is easy to build from source and runs efficiently, using little memory or CPU time. Even though it is a light web server compared to Apache, Nginx is able to handle high traffic loads. The WordPress blogging system recently converted all of its load balancers to Nginx, using the upstream hash module to serve 8-9 thousand requests per second. Unlike lighttpd, the author is actively developing Nginx and the community is constantly building add on modules. Finally, you can easily secure Nginx to better protect your machine from abusive clients. Nginx web server how to https://calomel.org/nginx.html -- Calomel @ https://calomel.org Open Source Research and Reference On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 03:14:40PM +0100, Nuno Magalh??es wrote: I have an old Compaq Armada 1500c with 32MB of RAM i want to use as a webserver. Having it support PHP and mySQL would be fun since i intend to use both. The same machine has sshd running and might also become a print-server for a parallel Epson Stylus Color 740 if i can decide on the print server (apparently either cups or lpd, whichever's lighter). I haven't fiddled with it a whole lot, it's mostly just on and showing top through ssh. Right now its memory line is this: Memory: Real: 7200K/20M act/tot Free: 3944K Swap: 0K/66M used/tot with its most cpu-intensive process being sendmail. I have no mailserver, what's that for? So, big servers like Apache are kind of out of the question. From the package list i found Bozotic, lighttpd, nginx, p5-HTTP-Server-Simple and thttpd. Of those, nginx caught my eye and while searching i came across cherokee-project.com, Hiawatha (hiawatha.leisink.org) and also shttpd.sourceforge.net Is anyone using any of these or a lightweight httpd in general? I don't mean small as in d116.com/ace/ nor are my resources as low as d116.com/spud/ but useful input would be welcome. Ya know, the constructive criticism type. TIA -- Nuno MagalhC#es -- Darrin Chandler| Phoenix BSD User Group | MetaBUG [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://phxbug.org/ | http://metabug.org/ http://www.stilyagin.com/ | Daemons in the Desert | Global BUG Federation
Re: Light HTTP servers.
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 10:12 PM, Calomel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nuno, I would highly suggest looking into Nginx. It is easy to build from source and runs efficiently, using little memory or CPU time. Even though it is a light web server compared to Apache, Nginx is able to handle high traffic loads. The WordPress blogging system recently converted all of its load balancers to Nginx, using the upstream hash module to serve 8-9 thousand requests per second. Unlike lighttpd, the author is actively developing Nginx and the community is constantly building add on modules. Finally, you can easily secure Nginx to better protect your machine from abusive clients. current problem for nginx is, it doesn't handle php-fastcgi process spawning. AFAIK it can be solved with either patching php manually with php-fpm ( http://php-fpm.anight.org/ ) or using lighttpd's spawn-fcgi. IMO, in general, configuring lighttpd+php is easier than nginx+php. YMMV Nginx web server how to https://calomel.org/nginx.html -- Calomel @ https://calomel.org Open Source Research and Reference On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 03:14:40PM +0100, Nuno Magalh??es wrote: I have an old Compaq Armada 1500c with 32MB of RAM i want to use as a webserver. Having it support PHP and mySQL would be fun since i intend to use both. The same machine has sshd running and might also become a print-server for a parallel Epson Stylus Color 740 if i can decide on the print server (apparently either cups or lpd, whichever's lighter). I haven't fiddled with it a whole lot, it's mostly just on and showing top through ssh. Right now its memory line is this: Memory: Real: 7200K/20M act/tot Free: 3944K Swap: 0K/66M used/tot with its most cpu-intensive process being sendmail. I have no mailserver, what's that for? So, big servers like Apache are kind of out of the question. From the package list i found Bozotic, lighttpd, nginx, p5-HTTP-Server-Simple and thttpd. Of those, nginx caught my eye and while searching i came across cherokee-project.com, Hiawatha (hiawatha.leisink.org) and also shttpd.sourceforge.net Is anyone using any of these or a lightweight httpd in general? I don't mean small as in d116.com/ace/ nor are my resources as low as d116.com/spud/ but useful input would be welcome. Ya know, the constructive criticism type. TIA -- Nuno MagalhC#es
Re: Light HTTP servers.
lighttpd. -- Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] BS Web Services, http://bsws.de Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting - Hamburg Amsterdam
Re: Light HTTP servers.
Henning Brauer wrote: lighttpd. So far I am very happy with lighttpd, including running with PHP via FastCGI. I don't really trust the PHP applications I run, so they operate in a separate chroot (via spawn-php.sh) as a separate user in addition to lighttpd itself being chroot as a separate user. Another poster said lighttpd isn't being actively developed, but it's active enough for me - my bug reports have been fixed and new releases put out to address them. Other than setting up the chroot FastCGI, it was quite easy to configure and get running. I think the biggest problem will be running MySQL and PHP in 32MB, the OP may need to tweak MySQL to not use too much memory and restrict the number of PHP processes to run (1 or 2, I'd say). -- Matthew Weigel hacker unique idempot.ent
Re: Light HTTP servers.
* Henning Brauer wrote: lighttpd. can it do reverse proxying, as needed for zope? -- Henning Brauer, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] BS Web Services, http://bsws.de Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting - Hamburg Amsterdam
