Alternatives to Passenger logo

Alternatives to Passenger

Puma, NGINX, Apache HTTP Server, Microsoft IIS, and Apache Tomcat are the most popular alternatives and competitors to Passenger.
1.4K
244
+ 1
200

What is Passenger and what are its top alternatives?

Phusion Passenger is a web server and application server, designed to be fast, robust and lightweight. It takes a lot of complexity out of deploying web apps, adds powerful enterprise-grade features that are useful in production, and makes administration much easier and less complex.
Passenger is a tool in the Web Servers category of a tech stack.
Passenger is an open source tool with 4.7K GitHub stars and 522 GitHub forks. Here’s a link to Passenger's open source repository on GitHub

Top Alternatives to Passenger

  • Puma

    Puma

    Unlike other Ruby Webservers, Puma was built for speed and parallelism. Puma is a small library that provides a very fast and concurrent HTTP 1.1 server for Ruby web applications. ...

  • NGINX

    NGINX

    nginx [engine x] is an HTTP and reverse proxy server, as well as a mail proxy server, written by Igor Sysoev. According to Netcraft nginx served or proxied 30.46% of the top million busiest sites in Jan 2018. ...

  • Apache HTTP Server

    Apache HTTP Server

    The Apache HTTP Server is a powerful and flexible HTTP/1.1 compliant web server. Originally designed as a replacement for the NCSA HTTP Server, it has grown to be the most popular web server on the Internet. ...

  • Microsoft IIS

    Microsoft IIS

    Internet Information Services (IIS) for Windows Server is a flexible, secure and manageable Web server for hosting anything on the Web. From media streaming to web applications, IIS's scalable and open architecture is ready to handle the most demanding tasks. ...

  • Apache Tomcat

    Apache Tomcat

    Apache Tomcat powers numerous large-scale, mission-critical web applications across a diverse range of industries and organizations. ...

  • OpenResty

    OpenResty

    OpenResty (aka. ngx_openresty) is a full-fledged web application server by bundling the standard Nginx core, lots of 3rd-party Nginx modules, as well as most of their external dependencies. ...

  • LiteSpeed

    LiteSpeed

    It is a drop-in Apache replacement and the leading high-performance, high-scalability server. You can replace your existing Apache server with it without changing your configuration or operating system details. As a drop-in replacement, it allows you to quickly eliminate Apache bottlenecks in 15 minutes with zero downtime. ...

  • Gunicorn

    Gunicorn

    Gunicorn is a pre-fork worker model ported from Ruby's Unicorn project. The Gunicorn server is broadly compatible with various web frameworks, simply implemented, light on server resources, and fairly speedy. ...

Passenger alternatives & related posts

Puma logo

Puma

328
205
17
A Modern, Concurrent Web Server for Ruby
328
205
+ 1
17

related Puma posts

Jerome Dalbert
Senior Backend Engineer at StackShare · | 6 upvotes · 155.4K views
Shared insights
on
Unicorn
Puma
Rails
at

We switched from Unicorn (process model) to Puma (threaded model) to decrease the memory footprint of our Rails production web server. Memory indeed dropped from 6GB to only 1GB!

We just had to decrease our worker count and increase our thread count instead. Performance (response time and throughput) remained the same, if not slightly better. We had no thread-safety errors, which was good.

Free bonus points are:

  • Requests are blazing fast on our dev and staging environments!
  • Puma has first-class support for WebSockets, so we know for sure that Rails ActionCable or GraphQL subscriptions will work great.
  • Being on Puma makes us even more "default Rails"-compliant since it is the default Rails web server these days.
See more

related NGINX posts

Recently I have been working on an open source stack to help people consolidate their personal health data in a single database so that AI and analytics apps can be run against it to find personalized treatments. We chose to go with a #containerized approach leveraging Docker #containers with a local development environment setup with Docker Compose and nginx for container routing. For the production environment we chose to pull code from GitHub and build/push images using Jenkins and using Kubernetes to deploy to Amazon EC2.

We also implemented a dashboard app to handle user authentication/authorization, as well as a custom SSO server that runs on Heroku which allows experts to easily visit more than one instance without having to login repeatedly. The #Backend was implemented using my favorite #Stack which consists of FeathersJS on top of Node.js and ExpressJS with PostgreSQL as the main database. The #Frontend was implemented using React, Redux.js, Semantic UI React and the FeathersJS client. Though testing was light on this project, we chose to use AVA as well as ESLint to keep the codebase clean and consistent.

See more
Gabriel Pa
Shared insights
on
Traefik
NGINX
at

We switched to Traefik so we can use the REST API to dynamically configure subdomains and have the ability to redirect between multiple servers.

We still use nginx with a docker-compose to expose the traffic from our APIs and TCP microservices, but for managing routing to the internet Traefik does a much better job

The biggest win for naologic was the ability to set dynamic configurations without having to restart the server

See more
Apache HTTP Server logo

Apache HTTP Server

54.4K
13.5K
1.4K
The most popular web server on the Internet since April 1996
54.4K
13.5K
+ 1
1.4K

related Apache HTTP Server posts

Tim Abbott
Shared insights
on
NGINX
Apache HTTP Server
at

We've been happy with nginx as part of our stack. As an open source web application that folks install on-premise, the configuration system for the webserver is pretty important to us. I have a few complaints (e.g. the configuration syntax for conditionals is a pain), but overall we've found it pretty easy to build a configurable set of options (see link) for how to run Zulip on nginx, both directly and with a remote reverse proxy in front of it, with a minimum of code duplication.

Certainly I've been a lot happier with it than I was working with Apache HTTP Server in past projects.

See more
Marcel Kornegoor
Shared insights
on
NGINX
Apache HTTP Server

nginx or Apache HTTP Server that's the question. The best choice depends on what it needs to serve. In general, Nginx performs better with static content, where Apache and Nginx score roughly the same when it comes to dynamic content. Since most webpages and web-applications use both static and dynamic content, a combination of both platforms may be the best solution.

Since both webservers are easy to deploy and free to use, setting up a performance or feature comparison test is no big deal. This way you can see what solutions suits your application or content best. Don't forget to look at other aspects, like security, back-end compatibility (easy of integration) and manageability, as well.

A reasonably good comparison between the two can be found in the link below.

See more

related Microsoft IIS posts

Apache Tomcat logo

Apache Tomcat

9.6K
6.2K
200
An open source software implementation of the Java Servlet and JavaServer Pages technologies
9.6K
6.2K
+ 1
200
PROS OF APACHE TOMCAT
CONS OF APACHE TOMCAT
    No cons available

    related Apache Tomcat posts

    Остап Комплікевич

    I need some advice to choose an engine for generation web pages from the Spring Boot app. Which technology is the best solution today? 1) JSP + JSTL 2) Apache FreeMarker 3) Thymeleaf Or you can suggest even other perspective tools. I am using Spring Boot, Spring Web, Spring Data, Spring Security, PostgreSQL, Apache Tomcat in my project. I have already tried to generate pages using jsp, jstl, and it went well. However, I had huge problems via carrying already created static pages, to jsp format, because of syntax. Thanks.

    See more

    Java Spring JUnit

    Apache HTTP Server Apache Tomcat

    MySQL

    See more
    OpenResty logo

    OpenResty

    2.1K
    146
    2
    Turning Nginx into a Full-fledged Web App Server
    2.1K
    146
    + 1
    2

    related OpenResty posts

    Chris McFadden
    VP, Engineering at SparkPost · | 7 upvotes · 209.9K views
    Shared insights
    on
    NGINX
    OpenResty
    Lua
    at

    We use nginx and OpenResty as our API proxy running on EC2 for auth, caching, and some rate limiting for our dozens of microservices. Since OpenResty support embedded Lua we were able to write a custom access module that calls out to our authentication service with the resource, method, and access token. If that succeeds then critical account info is passed down to the underlying microservice. This proxy approach keeps all authentication and authorization in one place and provides a unified CX for our API users. Nginx is fast and cheap to run though we are always exploring alternatives that are also economical. What do you use?

    See more

    At Kong while building an internal tool, we struggled to route metrics to Prometheus and logs to Logstash without incurring too much latency in our metrics collection.

    We replaced nginx with OpenResty on the edge of our tool which allowed us to use the lua-nginx-module to run Lua code that captures metrics and records telemetry data during every request’s log phase. Our code then pushes the metrics to a local aggregator process (written in Go) which in turn exposes them in Prometheus Exposition Format for consumption by Prometheus. This solution reduced the number of components we needed to maintain and is fast thanks to NGINX and LuaJIT.

    See more
    LiteSpeed logo

    LiteSpeed

    1.8K
    58
    0
    A drop-in Apache replacement and the leading high-performance, high-scalability server
    1.8K
    58
    + 1
    0
    PROS OF LITESPEED
      No pros available
      CONS OF LITESPEED
        No cons available

        related LiteSpeed posts

        Gunicorn logo

        Gunicorn

        767
        587
        69
        A Python WSGI HTTP Server for UNIX
        767
        587
        + 1
        69
        PROS OF GUNICORN
        CONS OF GUNICORN
          No cons available

          related Gunicorn posts

          Pierre Chapuis

          Unlike our frontend, we chose Flask, a microframework, for our backend. We use it with Python 3 and Gunicorn.

          One of the reasons was that I have significant experience with this framework. However, it also was a rather straightforward choice given that our backend almost only serves REST APIs, and that most of the work is talking to the database with SQLAlchemy .

          We could have gone with something like Hug but it is kind of early. We might revisit that decision for new services later on.

          See more

          I use Gunicorn because does one thing - it’s a WSGI HTTP server - and it does it well. Deploy it quickly and easily, and let the rest of your stack do what the rest of your stack does well, wherever that may be.

          uWSGI “aims at developing a full stack for building hosting services” - if that’s a thing you need then ok, but I like the principle of doing one thing well, and I deploy to platforms like Heroku and AWS Elastic Beanstalk where the rest of the “hosting service” is provided and managed for me.

          See more