What is Apache HTTP Server?
What is Pow?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Why do developers choose Pow?
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
What are the cons of using Apache HTTP Server?
What are the cons of using Pow?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
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.
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.
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.
We use httpd in front of our Tomcat web server. Apache terminates the TLS connections and forwards to the embedded Tomcat server(s) for request processing. We also use it as load balancer for multi-server deployments.
Most known webserver. We are using Apache due to his htaccess feature but its just a backedn to proccess PHP. In font of Apache we are using NGINX to server static files
Pow is what we use for development on our local machines. It's easy to setup, and easy to maintain since it also eliminates the need for maintaining a /etc/hosts file.
Apache splits static traffic from application traffic, as well as providing a selection of tools to assist in running of the site (rewrites, logging etc).
Primary web server, delivers PHP-rendered pages as well as static HTML content. Ruby CGIs deliver objects to browser-side code using REST/JSON
modproxybalancer provides highly concurrent end-user browser connections, and manages session routing to the application cluster