CustomBuild Nginx edition

N

nservices

Verified User
Joined
Dec 11, 2008
Messages
301
Is there any chance in the foreseeable future the boy with nginx get replacement instead of Apache as additional option of custombuild?

Best Regards,
Star Network.
 
Why is Nginx needed I though apache 2.4 was far better?
 
am running few servers for Magento eCommerce platform
nginx vs apache 2.4
nginx is significantly faster.

Best Regards,
Star Network.
 
Very much agree and look forward to.The apache2.4 upgrade there are some problems.
 
Hello,

We can explore the idea for the future.
We'll have to see how much time Martynas has available.

One of the reason we have not included it, it because many people like many options.
There will be fewer options to pick from once used (I'm sure there are still many good options with nginx), but there are just likely going to be fewer.

John
 
Why Nginx over Varnish? I'm not posing this to be difficult, just want to know why people feel Nginx is that much better. I've had the chance to use Varnish using a plugin that was sold her that is no longer supported/updated for DirectAdmin that won't even install under CentOS 6.2, but had very good results with it. It served as a great cache with an apache/php back end, where dynamic files and htaccess could still work flawlessly.

From what I've seen Nginx doesn't handle things quite that easily, but I may be wrong... If so, tell me... Thats what I'm looking for as I need to get another solid caching front end in place.
 
this is my answer:
am running few servers for Magento eCommerce platform
nginx vs apache 2.4
nginx is significantly faster.

(both with apc cache, and same mysql configurations)

Best Regards,
Star Network.
 
Scott DeLeury said:
From what I've seen Nginx doesn't handle things quite that easily, but I may be wrong... If so, tell me... Thats what I'm looking for as I need to get another solid caching front end in place.
Click to expand...
nginx can handle PHP files fine too (using PHP-FPM). The biggest downside is that you can't use .htaccess/.htpasswd files.

I worked with Varnish (+ Apache), nginx and Apache. And by far I prefer nginx over anything else. It's easy to configure and the performance gain is great (with both dynamic and static content).
 
Wow that sucks... I hope they plan to add support for the .htaccess/.htpasswd files in the future.
 
scsi said:
Wow that sucks... I hope they plan to add support for the .htaccess/.htpasswd files in the future.
Click to expand...
No they won't. .htaccess and .htpasswd are Apache-related files. You can easily port mod_rewrite rules to nginx rewrite-rules. And other configuration options are even easier to setup in nginx.
 
scsi said:
Wow that sucks... I hope they plan to add support for the .htaccess/.htpasswd files in the future.
Click to expand...

There are mentions of 3rd party modules for nginx (you can read nginx mailing list archives), but I don't know details... Support of .htaccess would decrease speed of nginx, so Igor Sysoev (the author of the software) is not going to implement it.
 
So if Nginx does everything apache does and its better why do we even use apache as a default.
 
Still a lot of scripts and CMS do use .htaccess unfortunately. So I guess it's the main reason.
 
It would be nice to have it as a option within custombuild, so we could offer both setups to customers. Maybe slowly apache will fade away, maybe not. But at the moment it seems like it's quite popular.
 
Arieh said:
It would be nice to have it as a option within custombuild, so we could offer both setups to customers. Maybe slowly apache will fade away, maybe not. But at the moment it seems like it's quite popular.
Click to expand...

In custombuild with option - as proxy to apache (to serve static content) or standalone... Mmmm... ;-)
 
The direction of this discussion would point to a full nginx php-fpm setup, without apache. But we maybe need some more pro's and con's, and some stats to back it up. I've googled it quickly and I see varied results.
 
Few pros/cons which I can think of.

Pros:
- Soft-restarts/reloads without any downtime
- Config-tests
- Better content serving
- GeoIP can be easily enabled (I think many scripters/coders like to have this)
- Configuration syntax is a lot better than Apache's

Cons:
- Lack of htaccess / htpasswd support
- Some scripts use functions like apache_note, which don't exist when using PHP-FPM
- Default server-status page of nginx is less detailed than Apache's
- Some SERVER variables differ (both key & values) a bit. This can be partly fixed by changing the nginx server config to make the environment a bit more Apache-like
 
The Pro I personally wanted to see is that if the performance is just really that much better as people say.

But anyway nginx+php-fpm would be for the tech minded customer, given that most cms' and scripts indeed are just build for apache. Maybe it will change over time if it turns out nginx is really better.

As a webdeveloper myself it would definitely not be a problem and if it gives a performance boost, why not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top