DragonFly BSD
DragonFly users List (threaded) for 2005-01
[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]

Re[2]: lighttpd?

From: Scott Nasuta <tcslv@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 15:40:56 -0800

Hello Tomaž,

Saturday, January 29, 2005, 4:37:49 AM, you wrote:

> Scott Nasuta wrote:
>> Lighttpd had a few errors each time I tried to start the httpd server
>> after it compiled cleanly. Various configuration errors complaining
>> about invalid characters in the config file

> This is weird. Did you use port for it? It compiles and installs just fine.

Yeah I used the port of course. I tried it with gcc2 and gcc34
thinking that was the issue. It compiled cleanly without hitch
everytime but was getting startup errors when I went to start it
through the lighttpd.sh file and the actual .bin itself. I had emails
all ready to post with the actual errors to the maintainer and this
board but figured I would get little help since I thought lighttpd was
fairly obscure. Now I wish I would have just continued and posted the
errors as I really wanted to use lighttpd instead of, like you said,
resource intensive Apache.

But in the interest of time and such I just figured a ton of high
traffic sites can't be wrong and I know Apache worked so I moved on.
I'm sure the minor performance loss will be unnoticeable anyways as it
isn't ebay busy and I have 1.3GB ram.

> it does work nicely but uses LOTS of memory when you run a busy site -
> lighttpd uses much less (less than 2 megs at start and now in production
> around 6-7 megs) and PHP module overhead is no issue since with FastCGI
> php processes only get actual PHP files. With such approach persistant
> connections are actually useful since it can do database operations 
> faster, because connection is already open. Apps which need to do a lot
> of small operations with db and needs to be fast love this!

This is the conclusion I came too as well after a little research. I
was looking to do FastCGI instead of mod_perl as it was faster in some
benchmarks plus lighttpd was faster as well. But I also found some
favoring mod_perl too. Again millions of sites can't be wrong.

I just now wonder if I should have used Apache2 without the threading
enabled as it shows speed improvement over 1.3x. Without threading
because of threading issues still in the FreeBSD core of Dragonfly.

Thanks for the replies. Next time I will give lighttpd a better
chance. But don't like errors when something else, and arguably
better (Apache), already works.

Best regards,
 Scott                            mailto:tcslv@xxxxxxx

[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]