StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Application & Data
  3. Platform as a Service
  4. Web Servers
  5. Apache Tomcat vs Cherokee vs Cowboy

Apache Tomcat vs Cherokee vs Cowboy

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Cherokee
Cherokee
Stacks4
Followers26
Votes4
Apache Tomcat
Apache Tomcat
Stacks16.9K
Followers12.6K
Votes201
GitHub Stars8.0K
Forks5.3K
Cowboy
Cowboy
Stacks711
Followers72
Votes19
GitHub Stars7.4K
Forks1.2K

Apache Tomcat vs Cherokee vs Cowboy: What are the differences?

Introduction

In the world of web server software, Apache Tomcat and Cherokee and Cowboy each have their own unique features and capabilities. Understanding the key differences between them is essential for making an informed decision on which to use for your web development projects.

  1. Programming Language Support: Apache Tomcat primarily supports Java-based applications, making it a popular choice for Java developers. In contrast, Cherokee and Cowboy are designed to be more language-agnostic, allowing for the hosting of applications written in a variety of programming languages, including Python, Ruby, and PHP.

  2. Configuration Complexity: Tomcat's configuration can be more intricate and detailed, requiring a deeper understanding of its XML configuration files. On the other hand, Cherokee and Cowboy offer simpler and more intuitive configuration options, making them more user-friendly for those who prefer a more straightforward setup process.

  3. Server Size and Performance: Apache Tomcat is known for its robustness and scalability, making it suitable for handling larger volumes of traffic and more extensive applications. Cherokee and Cowboy, while still capable of handling moderate workloads, may not be as optimized for high-performance requirements as Apache Tomcat.

  4. Community and Support: The Apache Tomcat project has a large and active community of developers and users, providing a wealth of resources, documentation, and support. Cherokee and Cowboy, while also supported by dedicated communities, may not have the same level of widespread adoption and established support infrastructure as Apache Tomcat.

  5. Embedded Features: Apache Tomcat is primarily a servlet container and JSP engine, whereas Cherokee and Cowboy offer a wider range of features, including built-in support for HTTP/2, WebSockets, and other modern web technologies. This makes Cherokee and Cowboy a more versatile choice for developers looking to leverage advanced web capabilities out of the box.

  6. Scalability and Load Balancing: Cherokee and Cowboy are known for their efficient handling of concurrent connections, making them suitable for scenarios requiring high levels of scalability and load balancing. Apache Tomcat, while capable of handling significant loads, may require additional setup and configuration for these advanced features.

In Summary, the key differences between Apache Tomcat and Cherokee and Cowboy lie in their programming language support, configuration complexity, server size and performance, community and support, embedded features, and scalability and load balancing capabilities.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Detailed Comparison

Cherokee
Cherokee
Apache Tomcat
Apache Tomcat
Cowboy
Cowboy

Cherokee is highly efficient, extremely lightweight and provides rock solid stability. Among its many features there is one that deserves special credit: a user friendly interface called cherokee-admin that is provided for a no-hassle configuration of every single feature of the server.

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

Cowboy aims to provide a complete HTTP stack in a small code base. It is optimized for low latency and low memory usage, in part because it uses binary strings. Cowboy provides routing capabilities, selectively dispatching requests to handlers written in Erlang.

Statistics
GitHub Stars
-
GitHub Stars
8.0K
GitHub Stars
7.4K
GitHub Forks
-
GitHub Forks
5.3K
GitHub Forks
1.2K
Stacks
4
Stacks
16.9K
Stacks
711
Followers
26
Followers
12.6K
Followers
72
Votes
4
Votes
201
Votes
19
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 4
    The logo is cute
Pros
  • 79
    Easy
  • 72
    Java
  • 49
    Popular
  • 1
    Spring web
Cons
  • 3
    Blocking - each http request block a thread
  • 2
    Easy to set up
Pros
  • 8
    Websockets integration
  • 6
    Cool name
  • 3
    Good to use with Erlang
  • 2
    Anime mascot

What are some alternatives to Cherokee, Apache Tomcat, Cowboy?

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.

Unicorn

Unicorn

Unicorn is an HTTP server for Rack applications designed to only serve fast clients on low-latency, high-bandwidth connections and take advantage of features in Unix/Unix-like kernels. Slow clients should only be served by placing a reverse proxy capable of fully buffering both the the request and response in between Unicorn and slow clients.

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.

Passenger

Passenger

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.

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.

Jetty

Jetty

Jetty is used in a wide variety of projects and products, both in development and production. Jetty can be easily embedded in devices, tools, frameworks, application servers, and clusters. See the Jetty Powered page for more uses of Jetty.

lighttpd

lighttpd

lighttpd has a very low memory footprint compared to other webservers and takes care of cpu-load. Its advanced feature-set (FastCGI, CGI, Auth, Output-Compression, URL-Rewriting and many more) make lighttpd the perfect webserver-software for every server that suffers load problems.

Swoole

Swoole

It is an open source high-performance network framework using an event-driven, asynchronous, non-blocking I/O model which makes it scalable and efficient.

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.

Related Comparisons

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Liquibase
Flyway

Flyway vs Liquibase