Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Apache HTTP Server vs Cowboy vs nginx: What are the differences?
Architecture: Apache HTTP Server uses a multi-process, multi-threaded architecture, allowing it to handle a high volume of requests efficiently. Cowboy, on the other hand, uses a single-threaded, event-driven architecture which makes it highly efficient for handling a large number of concurrent connections. Nginx also follows an event-driven architecture, but it is known for its lightweight and efficient handling of static content.
Configuration: Apache HTTP Server has a complex configuration syntax which can be challenging for beginners, but it offers a wide range of configuration options for customization. Cowboy has a simpler configuration compared to Apache, making it easier to set up and manage. Nginx also has a straightforward configuration syntax that is easy to understand and work with.
Performance: When it comes to performance, Cowboy and Nginx are known for their high performance and low resource consumption, making them ideal choices for handling a large number of concurrent requests. Apache HTTP Server, while still a powerful web server, may not be as efficient in handling high traffic loads compared to Cowboy and Nginx due to its multi-process architecture.
Modules: Apache HTTP Server has a vast collection of modules that extend its functionality, allowing users to customize their server for different purposes. Cowboy and Nginx, on the other hand, have a more limited selection of modules, but they are designed to be lightweight and efficient out of the box without the need for extensive customization.
Supported Languages: Apache HTTP Server supports a wide range of programming languages and technologies, making it a versatile choice for hosting dynamic websites. Cowboy and Nginx are more focused on supporting specific programming languages and frameworks, such as Erlang for Cowboy and Nginx for Nginx, making them suitable for specific use cases.
Community Support: Apache HTTP Server has a large and active community of developers and users who contribute to its development and provide support through forums and online resources. Cowboy and Nginx also have strong communities, but they may not be as extensive as the Apache community, which can affect the availability of resources and support.
In Summary, Apache HTTP Server, Cowboy, and Nginx differ in their architecture, configuration, performance, modules, supported languages, and community support, making each suitable for different web hosting needs.
I am diving into web development, both front and back end. I feel comfortable with administration, scripting and moderate coding in bash, Python and C++, but I am also a Windows fan (i love inner conflict). What are the votes on web servers? IIS is expensive and restrictive (has Windows adoption of open source changed this?) Apache has the history but seems to be at the root of most of my Infosec issues, and I know nothing about nginx (is it too new to rely on?). And no, I don't know what I want to do on the web explicitly, but hosting and data storage (both cloud and tape) are possibilities. Ready, aim fire!
I would pick nginx over both IIS and Apace HTTP Server any day. Combine it with docker, and as you grow maybe even traefik, and you'll have a really flexible solution for serving http content where you can take sites and projects up and down without effort, easily move it between systems and dont have to handle any dependencies on your actual local machine.
From a StackShare Community member: "We are a LAMP shop currently focused on improving web performance for our customers. We have made many front-end optimizations and now we are considering replacing Apache with nginx. I was wondering if others saw a noticeable performance gain or any other benefits by switching."
I use nginx because it is very light weight. Where Apache tries to include everything in the web server, nginx opts to have external programs/facilities take care of that so the web server can focus on efficiently serving web pages. While this can seem inefficient, it limits the number of new bugs found in the web server, which is the element that faces the client most directly.
I use nginx because its more flexible and easy to configure
I use Apache HTTP Server because it's intuitive, comprehensive, well-documented, and just works
For us, NGINX is a lite HTTP server easy to configure. On our research, we found a well-documented software we a lot of support from the community.
We have been using it alongside tools like certbot and it has been a total success.
We can easily configure our sites and have a folder for available vs enabled sites, and with the nginx -t command we can easily check everything is running fine.
- Server rendered HTML output from PHP is being migrated to the client as Vue.js components, future plans to provide additional content, and other new miscellaneous features all result in a substantial increase of static files needing to be served from the server. NGINX has better performance than Apache for serving static content.
- The change to NGINX will require switching from PHP to PHP-FPM resulting in a distributed architecture with a higher complexity configuration, but this is outweighed by PHP-FPM being faster than PHP for processing requests.
- The NGINX + PHP-FPM setup now allows for horizontally scaling of resources rather vertically scaling the previously combined Apache + PHP resources.
- PHP shell tasks can now efficiently be decoupled from the application reducing main application footprint and allow for scaling of tasks on an individual basis.
I was in a situation where I have to configure 40 RHEL servers 20 each for Apache HTTP Server and Tomcat server. My task was to 1. configure LVM with required logical volumes, format and mount for HTTP and Tomcat servers accordingly. 2. Install apache and tomcat. 3. Generate and apply selfsigned certs to http server. 4. Modify default ports on Tomcat to different ports. 5. Create users on RHEL for application support team. 6. other administrative tasks like, start, stop and restart HTTP and Tomcat services.
I have utilized the power of ansible for all these tasks, which made it easy and manageable.
Pros of Apache HTTP Server
- Web server479
- Most widely-used web server305
- Virtual hosting217
- Fast148
- Ssl support138
- Since 199644
- Asynchronous28
- Robust5
- Proven over many years4
- Mature2
- Perfomance2
- Perfect Support1
- Many available modules0
- Many available modules0
Pros of Cowboy
- Websockets integration8
- Cool name6
- Good to use with Erlang3
- Anime mascot2
Pros of NGINX
- High-performance http server1.4K
- Performance894
- Easy to configure730
- Open source607
- Load balancer530
- Free289
- Scalability288
- Web server226
- Simplicity175
- Easy setup136
- Content caching30
- Web Accelerator21
- Capability15
- Fast14
- High-latency12
- Predictability12
- Reverse Proxy8
- The best of them7
- Supports http/27
- Great Community5
- Lots of Modules5
- Enterprise version5
- High perfomance proxy server4
- Embedded Lua scripting3
- Streaming media delivery3
- Streaming media3
- Reversy Proxy3
- Blash2
- GRPC-Web2
- Lightweight2
- Fast and easy to set up2
- Slim2
- saltstack2
- Virtual hosting1
- Narrow focus. Easy to configure. Fast1
- Along with Redis Cache its the Most superior1
- Ingress controller1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Apache HTTP Server
- Hard to set up4
Cons of Cowboy
Cons of NGINX
- Advanced features require subscription10
Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions
What is Apache HTTP Server?
What is Cowboy?
What is NGINX?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
What companies use Apache HTTP Server?
What companies use Cowboy?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
What tools integrate with Apache HTTP Server?
What tools integrate with Cowboy?
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
Blog Posts
+12
+17
+22
+31+46+15
+6+9