Should we add Lighttpd as an install/upgrade option?

Should we add Lighttpd as an install/upgrade option?

  • Yes, I would like to use lighttpd.

    Votes: 177 56.4%

  • I would like to use Nginx

    Votes: 66 21.0%

  • No, there are other things I would rather have.

    Votes: 71 22.6%
  • Total voters
    314
DirectAdmin Support

DirectAdmin Support

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Feb 27, 2003
Messages
9,158
Hello,

We've received a few requests about lighttpd. I did some searching and it appears to be a powerful program which can replace apache for those who wish it. It's supposedly more efficient than apache; large sites like youtube and wikipedia use it.
This is their site: http://www.lighttpd.net/

Now this poll is to decide if there is enough support to take the time to create an additional install option for it. We'll likely never completely abandon apache, as it's a workhorse, but lighthttpd does show potential in several areas.

The only catch is it's not as feature-rich as apache, so anyone who uses it may lose some functionality (until the features are implemented within it).

John
 
Note, this is a repost as the previous thread seems to have dissapeared.

Google cache showed some previous comments:
Lighttpd is nice, but I actually like Nginx more.
Click to expand...
I guess it may be worth it, however you must also consider that this isn't going to be applicable for a lot of customers due to the lack of .htaccess & mod_rewrite (apache compat.) support.

I would rather attention be put towards other things, such as native Awstats support.
Click to expand...
LxAdmin is the sole quality control panel that had employed lighttpd since inception...I'm very impressed with it. Many people prefer it for VPS, etc. and ideally suited too.

Yes, I'd like to see optional support for (switchable anytime) lighty (and nginx?) in DA.
Click to expand...
i'm currently using NginX to serve static files and apache for php, so .htaccess, rewrite still works. but can't do it automatically, have to manually configurate NginX. The performance result of NginX is very impressive.
Click to expand...
If anyone likes to see Nginx instead of lighttpd - just write that in this thread
Click to expand...
I say no, why?

Since Apache 2.2 has arrived the performance difference between Apache and lighttpd has decreased a lot!

Apache 2.2 is even faster with serving dynamic content then lighttpd with fastcgi.

Source: http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=527963

Making the speed difference between lighttpd and Apache so small, i don't think we would benefit from it when DA starts putting time in lighttpd instead of developing their panel further.

There is so much to do, so much features to fix, so much things to straigthen out.

I say, please focus on what you have atm and keep the new features away until you have all your current options working like they should.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't base any real performance analysis on a single benchmark or any benchmarks for that matter - what is more important is the real world results. I can tell you that both lighty and nginx are superior to Apache (yes, even 2.2.x), but DirectAdmin should focus on other things first.
Click to expand...
I agree http://www.litespeedtech.com/ is the best of all with 100+ people downloading a 700MB file from server still server load never crosses 0.2

that is what rapidshare uses
Click to expand...
LiteSpeed is nice but costs a lot. Standard edition is crippled.
Now, I'm looking for a CP having native support for LS...
Click to expand...
...etc... there were more, but if you have anymore comments to add/re-add, please do so ;)

John
 
I would absolutly love to see lighttp as an option in directadmin! I think its a great idea and great effort by the team to meet the demand here on the forum.

But more importaantly i'd like to see more robust support for apache 2.2 since it seems like the apache team is seriously working at making apache faster to compete with these alternatives, and i'd put my money on apache.

What I mean by ore robust support is to have a more integrated and easier way to apply apache 2.2 to new installs or already running machines that would be control panel based, where a click of a check box would allow apache 2.2 (or alternatives) to become activated. I dont like how directadmin is straying from its original intention of being a webbased control panel into a system where i seem to be spending more time in unix shell then on the web control panel...

although plesk generally sucks because of stability issues, i do like the effort they have put into making admin changes to the server completly web/icons based so you dont need to go into the box that much to make things happen.

Dont get me wrong, DA is by far the best, i just wish they would stick to the core idea behind the system.

just my 0.02 cents
 
I say no again.

I can't stress it enough, there are SO many bugs and issues to fix, please focus your energy on that first.

Choose a line to walk and get to the end of it, before adding new features.

I sum:

* Exim wich binds on port 80 with no reason
* Apache being restarted the whole time, wich causes some serious stability issues. DirectAdmin uses restart instead of graceful, wich kills all the active connections
* vm-pop3d and imapd who crash a lot and are seriously outdated. Dovecot should be more worked out and come as default, no more choices, use dovecot. The Maildir format is also much, much better then the Mbox format.
* The scripts directory is a total mess, no naming conventions at all, just a bunch of scripts dumped in there and hey, find it our yourself!
* The templates directory is the same, no explenation at all, and no naming convention at all.
* The API also has no conventions at all, features are added random without being tested fully

DirectAdmin should put much more time in perfectioning their current system, then expanding the features.

Documenting all the scripts en template files is one of them. Making naming conventions for all these files, dividing them in subdirectories.

Also, buffer the number of Apache restarts. Like, only restart Apache once every 10 minutes and use graceful instead of restart, that workes much better.

There are so many details to fix and i would love to sum them all when encountering them and submit them to the DirectAdmin team, but i have the feeling they don't have a real roadmap.

There also is no bugtracking system at all, so we don't know what the open issues are for example.

And before i am put away as a old grumpy man who has to much time, no, i am not.

I have to manage 100+ DirectAdmin servers and they consume SO much time, i sometimes regret i have chosing DirectAdmin, but on the other hand, i never found a good alternative.

No please, focus on the current issues first and then put your time in new features!
 
Last edited:
I agree, there are too many bugs that you have too fix or you simply can not fix.

Exim on port 80 you can make a work around for it, but i totally agree that exim is not a good mailprogram.
 
I'd love to see the mail system cleaned up as a whole (Exim/Dovecot/SpamAssassin/ClamAV) and made a bit more robust. While I don't need it, I think a bit more automation in the GUI would help those less than console-inclined as well.

I have nothing against lighttpd but Apache 2.2 addresses 90% of the "advantages" that lighttpd brings to the table.

I think more time could be spent on automation (of upgrades, patches, etc) and really hardening the system. DirectAdmin is heads and tails better than Plesk and CPanel (I've used/hosted both before) when it comes to server load, process spawning and basic security but if you all could really nail down the stability factor (personally I've never had DA or any DA spawned process crash unless it was my fault but I digress) and drive home an enhanced security platform, I think you could really grow your business.
 
Nginx is much much better than Lighthttpd. I did some benchmarking on one Celeron, and Apache 2.x actually outperforms Lighthttpd, and Nginx outperforms them both, a lot.
 
I believe there are other, more critical, things that DA should consider working on rather than investng the time into making another Web server work with DA.

I feel a mail user panel should be created (every other control panel out there has one already), a bug tracking/feature tracking system (I have reported issues before that still have not been fixed in DA), UI improvements for certain DA config options so that those that are not shell savvy can spend less time admining the box for things that DA should be handling from the control panel end. improvements in the DNS management capabilities of DA, better and more feature rich skins support and branding, and I could go on.

Don't get me wrong, DA is a great control panel, and I have tried them all, but I think there are some core issues that need to be handled before trying to get other 3rd party software working with the panel when we already have things like Apache that work fine. Is there even a roadmap to show the future direction of DA?

This is just my $.02 for what it's worth. Thanks.
 
I have to agree, down the road someday you should worry about it, DA needs to focus on other things for now....

You have remote redundant DNS server support....
You have remot MySQL support...

What about remote exim support? There are many of us who have asked over and over for a more redundant email solution, it would be nice to have 2 email only DA servers which handled mail for all the DA installs. Just like we can do for DNS.

We need loadbalanced mail solutions.


With redundant Mail servers and redundant DNS servers and external MYSQL servers then...

Comes the need for Directadmin to support Loadbalancing with remote storage arrays such as iSCSI or SAN.


Your panel is by far the best in my opinion but there is a lack of availability concerns being addressed that are taken care of in other panels like Interworx and HSPhere


For those needing higher performance than Apache there is already a drop in replacement for directadmin called litespeed web server we upgraded our servers to it without any downtime or config rewrites or coding.

As far as the bugs being reported go, personally I have not found any bugs that anyone speaks of but I agree you should add a bug tracker to your website so people can communicate.

You also need a roadmap for directadmin so people can look forward to working with you on feature development and suggestions.

You have a great platform now give us the ability to provide better availability to our customers.


Thank you,

Quantum Net Solutions
 
Lighttpd and Nginx can effectively double your server capacity, that means saving a lot of money in extra servers, it's not a toy but a very useful tool. And it's only a matter of time until all major control panels support webservers other than Apache, so Direct Admin can take the lead here by implementing it now. The other priority is clustering.
 
I stand with those who say there's a lot of stuff to finish/improve/etc., before adding a new webserver.

Jeff
 
We should keep this thread on topic with web-server software, as that is what the directadmin people are asking us about, everyone wants every feature under the sun, but lets keep our discussion focues on web servers instead of exim, etc etc...

I wanted to just add to my previous opinion that full support of Apache 2.2 should be implemented as soon as possible just to keep DA up to date and also add some kind of control panel implemented switch to go with Nginx or lighttpd. lite is probably more widely known although from a performance point of view, all my research ponts to nginx being superior. I still believe Apache 2.2 takes the cake because it offers most of the performance benefit as well as having the large community support to help weed out bugs, etc... and so by virtue it comes with stability.
 
Keep Apache and forget about the other 2 options for now.

Most of the current DA users will not see much of a benefit from the other 2 options. Besides, implementing anything other than something you know will be nothing but a complete headache. And what exactly is the benefit to it?

Is Youtube running DA? NO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top