It seems pretty hip from reading about, but I can't try it out right now. Has anyone here used LigHttpd? Is it, in fact, better than Apache?
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-18 22:19
If you mean better as in faster, most likely. Apache is like a Swiss-army knife that does many, many things but at the cost of complexity and speed.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-19 1:14
Apache is hardly a slouch under load either. You must have a very strange setup indeed for Apache to start causing load issues before you start saturating your NIC(s).
The only thing in any server that'd impress me is decent QoS with a bandwidth limiter and high granularity. Most of the ones for apache are ugly, coarse, and only work with 1.3 anyway.
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-19 2:08
unless your just service static content, you will never notice the speed diffrence.
and as 3 said, apache runs damn good even under high load.
that said, i would suggest fly httpd, if its still arround.