Apache HTTP Server vs Sanic: What are the differences?
Apache HTTP Server: The most popular web server on the Internet since April 1996. 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; Sanic: Python 3.5+ web server that's written to go fast. Sanic is a Flask-like Python 3.5+ web server that's written to go fast. It's based on the work done by the amazing folks at magicstack. On top of being Flask-like, Sanic supports async request handlers.
Apache HTTP Server and Sanic can be primarily classified as "Web Servers" tools.
"Web server" is the primary reason why developers consider Apache HTTP Server over the competitors, whereas "Asyncio" was stated as the key factor in picking Sanic.
Apache HTTP Server and Sanic are both open source tools. Sanic with 12.3K GitHub stars and 1.15K forks on GitHub appears to be more popular than Apache HTTP Server with 2.19K GitHub stars and 652 GitHub forks.
According to the StackShare community, Apache HTTP Server has a broader approval, being mentioned in 6176 company stacks & 1048 developers stacks; compared to Sanic, which is listed in 5 company stacks and 6 developer stacks.
What is Apache HTTP Server?
What is Sanic?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
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 Sanic?
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.
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
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