Alternatives to Unicorn logo

Alternatives to Unicorn

Puma, Unicorns, NGINX, Apache HTTP Server, and Apache Tomcat are the most popular alternatives and competitors to Unicorn.
494
396
+ 1
295

What is Unicorn and what are its top alternatives?

Unicorn is a popular web server software known for its simplicity and speed. Its key features include easy configuration, support for common server configurations, and efficient handling of static files. However, Unicorn may lack advanced features like load balancing and clustering, which can be a limitation for larger applications.

  1. Puma: Puma is a multi-threaded web server that boasts high performance and concurrency. It is easy to configure and offers advanced features like process management and hot restarts. However, Puma may require more resources compared to Unicorn.
  2. Passenger: Passenger is a versatile web server that supports both Ruby and Node.js applications. It offers easy deployment and management tools, as well as load balancing capabilities. However, Passenger may have a steeper learning curve compared to Unicorn.
  3. Thin: Thin is a lightweight web server that focuses on simplicity and speed. It is easy to set up and can be used with a variety of Ruby frameworks. However, Thin may not have as many features as Unicorn.
  4. TorqueBox: TorqueBox is a Ruby application server that offers advanced features like messaging and scheduling capabilities. It provides robust support for Ruby applications and integrates well with popular frameworks. However, TorqueBox may be more complex to set up compared to Unicorn.
  5. Rainbows!: Rainbows! is a Ruby web server that aims to maximize performance and support for different concurrency models. It offers advanced features like automatic process management and load balancing. However, Rainbows! may have a higher memory footprint compared to Unicorn.
  6. Webrick: Webrick is a Ruby-based web server that comes bundled with Ruby installations. It is simple to use and is well-suited for development and testing purposes. However, Webrick may not be as performant as Unicorn for production environments.
  7. Trinidad: Trinidad is a JRuby application server that offers seamless integration with Ruby on Rails applications. It provides advanced features like clustering and hot deployment. However, Trinidad may require more memory compared to Unicorn.
  8. Mongrel: Mongrel is a fast and robust Ruby web server that focuses on performance and stability. It offers features like support for multiple virtual hosts and SSL integration. However, Mongrel may not be as actively maintained as Unicorn.
  9. Goliath: Goliath is a non-blocking Ruby web server framework that is built on top of EventMachine. It is well-suited for high-performance web applications and provides support for streaming responses. However, Goliath may have a steeper learning curve compared to Unicorn.
  10. Jetty: Jetty is a Java-based web server that offers high performance and scalability. It is well-suited for serving dynamic content and supports a wide range of Java technologies. However, Jetty may have a higher resource overhead compared to Unicorn.

Top Alternatives to Unicorn

  • 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. ...

  • Unicorns
    Unicorns

    Live stream your iPhone or iPad screen. Produced by Lookback.

  • 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. ...

  • Apache Tomcat
    Apache Tomcat

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

  • 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. ...

  • 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. ...

Unicorn alternatives & related posts

Puma logo

Puma

833
262
20
A Modern, Concurrent Web Server for Ruby
833
262
+ 1
20
PROS OF PUMA
  • 4
    Free
  • 3
    Convenient
  • 3
    Easy
  • 2
    Multithreaded
  • 2
    Consumes less memory than Unicorn
  • 2
    Default Rails server
  • 2
    First-class support for WebSockets
  • 1
    Lightweight
  • 1
    Fast
CONS OF PUMA
  • 0
    Uses `select` (limited client count)

related Puma posts

Jerome Dalbert
Principal Backend Software Engineer at StackShare · | 6 upvotes · 167.4K views
Shared insights
on
UnicornUnicornPumaPumaRailsRails
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
Mark Ndungu
Software Developer at Nouveta · | 4 upvotes · 28K views
Shared insights
on
UnicornUnicornPumaPumaRubyRubyRailsRails

I have an integration service that pulls data from third party systems saves it and returns it to the user of the service. We can pull large data sets with the service and response JSON can go up to 5MB with gzip compression. I currently use Rails 6 and Ruby 2.7.2 and Puma web server. Slow clients tend to prevent other users from accessing the system. Am considering a switch to Unicorn.

See more
Unicorns logo

Unicorns

2
8
0
Live stream your iPhone screen
2
8
+ 1
0
PROS OF UNICORNS
    Be the first to leave a pro
    CONS OF UNICORNS
      Be the first to leave a con

      related Unicorns posts

      NGINX logo

      NGINX

      112K
      59.9K
      5.5K
      A high performance free open source web server powering busiest sites on the Internet.
      112K
      59.9K
      + 1
      5.5K
      PROS OF NGINX
      • 1.4K
        High-performance http server
      • 893
        Performance
      • 730
        Easy to configure
      • 607
        Open source
      • 530
        Load balancer
      • 288
        Free
      • 288
        Scalability
      • 225
        Web server
      • 175
        Simplicity
      • 136
        Easy setup
      • 30
        Content caching
      • 21
        Web Accelerator
      • 15
        Capability
      • 14
        Fast
      • 12
        High-latency
      • 12
        Predictability
      • 8
        Reverse Proxy
      • 7
        The best of them
      • 7
        Supports http/2
      • 5
        Great Community
      • 5
        Lots of Modules
      • 5
        Enterprise version
      • 4
        High perfomance proxy server
      • 3
        Reversy Proxy
      • 3
        Streaming media delivery
      • 3
        Streaming media
      • 3
        Embedded Lua scripting
      • 2
        GRPC-Web
      • 2
        Blash
      • 2
        Lightweight
      • 2
        Fast and easy to set up
      • 2
        Slim
      • 2
        saltstack
      • 1
        Virtual hosting
      • 1
        Narrow focus. Easy to configure. Fast
      • 1
        Along with Redis Cache its the Most superior
      • 1
        Ingress controller
      CONS OF NGINX
      • 10
        Advanced features require subscription

      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

      Around the time of their Series A, Pinterest’s stack included Python and Django, with Tornado and Node.js as web servers. Memcached / Membase and Redis handled caching, with RabbitMQ handling queueing. Nginx, HAproxy and Varnish managed static-delivery and load-balancing, with persistent data storage handled by MySQL.

      See more
      Apache HTTP Server logo

      Apache HTTP Server

      64.1K
      22.3K
      1.4K
      Open-source HTTP server for modern operating systems including UNIX and Windows
      64.1K
      22.3K
      + 1
      1.4K
      PROS OF APACHE HTTP SERVER
      • 479
        Web server
      • 305
        Most widely-used web server
      • 217
        Virtual hosting
      • 148
        Fast
      • 138
        Ssl support
      • 44
        Since 1996
      • 28
        Asynchronous
      • 5
        Robust
      • 4
        Proven over many years
      • 2
        Mature
      • 2
        Perfomance
      • 1
        Perfect Support
      • 0
        Many available modules
      • 0
        Many available modules
      CONS OF APACHE HTTP SERVER
      • 4
        Hard to set up

      related Apache HTTP Server posts

      Tim Abbott
      Shared insights
      on
      NGINXNGINXApache HTTP ServerApache 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
      NGINXNGINXApache HTTP ServerApache 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
      Apache Tomcat logo

      Apache Tomcat

      16.3K
      12.2K
      201
      An open source software implementation of the Java Servlet and JavaServer Pages technologies
      16.3K
      12.2K
      + 1
      201
      PROS OF APACHE TOMCAT
      • 79
        Easy
      • 72
        Java
      • 49
        Popular
      • 1
        Spring web
      CONS OF APACHE TOMCAT
      • 2
        Blocking - each http request block a thread
      • 1
        Easy to set up

      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
      Microsoft IIS logo

      Microsoft IIS

      15.2K
      7.5K
      236
      A web server for Microsoft Windows
      15.2K
      7.5K
      + 1
      236
      PROS OF MICROSOFT IIS
      • 83
        Great with .net
      • 55
        I'm forced to use iis
      • 27
        Use nginx
      • 18
        Azure integration
      • 15
        Best for ms technologyes ms bullshit
      • 10
        Fast
      • 6
        Reliable
      • 6
        Performance
      • 4
        Powerful
      • 3
        Simple to configure
      • 3
        Webserver
      • 2
        Easy setup
      • 1
        Shipped with Windows Server
      • 1
        Ssl integration
      • 1
        Security
      • 1
        Охуенный
      CONS OF MICROSOFT IIS
      • 1
        Hard to set up

      related Microsoft IIS posts

      I am currently in school for computer science and am doing a class project about web servers. Our assignment is to research and select one of these web servers. Could you please let me know which one you would choose among NGINX, Microsoft IIS, and Apache HTTP Server and why?

      See more
      OpenResty logo

      OpenResty

      2.3K
      227
      0
      Turning Nginx into a Full-fledged Web App Server
      2.3K
      227
      + 1
      0
      PROS OF OPENRESTY
        Be the first to leave a pro
        CONS OF OPENRESTY
          Be the first to leave a con

          related OpenResty posts

          Chris McFadden
          VP, Engineering at SparkPost · | 7 upvotes · 290.4K views
          Shared insights
          on
          NGINXNGINXOpenRestyOpenRestyLuaLua
          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

          2.3K
          124
          0
          A drop-in Apache replacement and the leading high-performance, high-scalability server
          2.3K
          124
          + 1
          0
          PROS OF LITESPEED
            Be the first to leave a pro
            CONS OF LITESPEED
              Be the first to leave a con

              related LiteSpeed posts