4/10/2005
Lighttpd vs thttpd
I manage a forums site that utitlizes RRDNS to load balance several webservers to a single db server. The site serves a lot of images, so to tweak performance even further I wanted to try to move the images off on to a lightning fast file-only server (no PHP on minimal file transfer services). Its amazing how much faster a small footprint server can be. An optimized Apache2 process with only PHP and a handful of other modules compiled in is still 6-8MB. Running 300 of those at a time is a hog.
After some searching, I came of with these potentials:
After a quick look at both packages, thttpd seems to be more lightweight, which is just what I am after. lighttpd is definitely more full featured, it even supports a dozen or so Apache-style modules like vhosts, httpd authentication, Ruby and even PHP. On this project I don’t see the need for the majority of these so hopefully thttpd will be my baby. I’m going to try it out first and see.
More later…
Popularity: 27%
September 27th, 2005 at 12:40 pm
[…] I have written several times about this lighttpd install. I had to check something on the server last night so I popped over to the server-stats page to see what kind of throughput it was pushing. […]
August 7th, 2007 at 6:46 am
[…] have been asked several times recently about my original comparison of Lighttpd and thttpd and subsequent benchmarks for Lighttpd vs […]