From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CEE7138CF8 for ; Sun, 28 Jun 2015 22:18:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A65D6E088B; Sun, 28 Jun 2015 22:18:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com (mail-wi0-f172.google.com [209.85.212.172]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5EA75E085C for ; Sun, 28 Jun 2015 22:18:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wicnd19 with SMTP id nd19so56319602wic.1 for ; Sun, 28 Jun 2015 15:18:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=A23S0JRtuPh6SWnQBGLnfm1WEka2ZYrGtmLjTjUJsvw=; b=QT5soDPfJlXsYVGVRFpOQIDORqajJ94m0Vx+kwPocYR0Lnt3BPZDK610tf5xVFn/qv o91E0eZ8J98NW6myriqjR7pWzDu1C7YDmUMfNeYI7hQmQW/IxRVIkb6hRdW6zdEOtC4b r+eavqNIiIyTa29aDZLeHoCaGqHrwLDcl6Gr5XQ39XOAjjhmH67kmS4BgCZ77QXNECSo bHCkXMn+tshVHo9B4SD9pA4UobR42kaezPZLdRJLYQk34kxicihxRQ+EzBbtNxSSYZmB FjQnj5pZ5X3SGC9kHmwMElUUSrEKBKSVBkQtOLKTj+gyRjcsSWaFVZSxKbj0i1T2a13k 6wCQ== X-Received: by 10.194.104.98 with SMTP id gd2mr21680187wjb.35.1435529885193; Sun, 28 Jun 2015 15:18:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dell_xps.localnet (230.3.169.217.in-addr.arpa. [217.169.3.230]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id h9sm746492wjq.10.2015.06.28.15.18.04 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 28 Jun 2015 15:18:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Mick To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] OT: webserver reccomendations Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2015 23:17:41 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/4.0.5-gentoo; KDE/4.14.8; x86_64; ; ) References: <558F1981.6010106@iinet.net.au> <20150628194635.7f7cf807@digimed.co.uk> <558FF5EE.30403@iinet.net.au> In-Reply-To: <558FF5EE.30403@iinet.net.au> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart4276320.pvWqEJNuVP"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201506282317.58170.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: 5554ab6e-f3b5-494a-aabb-795866687bfe X-Archives-Hash: 1fd446c9d597c17d8c12779266981963 --nextPart4276320.pvWqEJNuVP Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sunday 28 Jun 2015 14:26:06 Bill Kenworthy wrote: > On 29/06/15 02:46, Neil Bothwick wrote: > > On Sun, 28 Jun 2015 18:27:57 +0100, Mick wrote: > >>> Why did you stop using lighttpd? > >>=20 > >> I avoided offering much explanation in my previous response because, > >> well ... I would feel uncomfortable doing so without a pint in my > >> hand. :-)) > >=20 > > So this is turning into a pub argument about which web server is best? = :) > >=20 > >> All these are good servers for particular use cases. My use case for > >> the lighttpd was an embedded system with a 266Mhz SoC and 32MB of RAM. > >> I tried thttpd, lighttpd, apache and nginx on it. > >>=20 > >> - lighttpd was heavier on memory usage, although not as bad as apache. > >>=20 > >> - nginx was light, fast and full of features. > >>=20 > >> - thttpd was very basic but got the job done with relatively low burden > >> on resources. Slower than ligthttpd. > >>=20 > >> - apache just about worked, but brought the little thing to its knees. > >>=20 > >> Don't ask me for benchmarks please, because this was done some years > >> ago. I went with nginx because it was faster and kept the CPU% and > >> MEM% lowest among competitors. The task in hand was to serve some > >> simple web pages with MRTG graphs on them. > >=20 > > Thanks for the explanation, it appears I owe you a pint if you're ever = in > > my neck of the woods... >=20 > same here! > I decided to start with lighttpd and it seems to do the job. Will look > at Nginx next. >=20 > Thanks, > BillK If I were to count the pints I owe you over the years for your kind help, t= he=20 first round is definitely on me! :-) =2D-=20 Regards, Mick --nextPart4276320.pvWqEJNuVP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAABCAAGBQJVkHKWAAoJELAdA+zwE4YeOTkH+QGdjNmnf38r5OTYFuQJrCIm JFdWeRF6Td2FcqX1AMW2uv1J3dI2zQOUliSudB25zyxPZtZtnOalk5Wir5YnK3O0 QuFCBtMsPAWQrA43hf7Z352fh8AEbQU4iLpFw69TAwzysrskamrbMw/EXO8H0RRR vLmHp+MUuGGHrYBfqDaJewtGKjWJPYY9RcSLmk5tgf7Qqs0LHV313KEgrva52tTs 2WkXp3DxTDTC9Sm/Vk7D8IXA4w2NcuVic7KuEdqYmdj67c8zAE6kECWSMU+0VgDA 72qC2Shkd95TY6YsC634EnWq0KGCOO7oFC8Y+mocnkm96PCSpOI/9hVyjUM0pz4= =XlCW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart4276320.pvWqEJNuVP--