[Cherokee] Benchmarks of cherokee vs nginx
tonyzakula at gmail.com
Tue May 24 16:33:11 MSD 2011
> Both web servers packages are compiled on ubuntu 11.04/openvz hosting.
Using openvz hosting? That is not even a real test. There are so
many variables, tweaks and adjustments when using OpenVZ that you
could not possibly count on that bench mark even if you controlled the
server. If you are using a hosting providers server, it makes it even
more nebulous because they will be using their own controls. The
memory and processing units are not even for real memory. With
OpenVZ you can tweak those at will.
The only way to get real benchmarks is on a real machine.
2011/5/24 Jędrzej Nowak <me at pigmej.eu>:
> You can easy compress things in cherokee too. Just enable it in
> cherokee-admin ;-)
> For "gzip static" like behaviour you need to enable flcache (with
> PURGE support for your config).
> IOCache in cherokee is caching only plain files when you don't use
> gzip... That's why.
> Jędrzej Nowak
> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Ryan B <mp3geek at gmail.com> wrote:
>> This is static content (only http, and no php enabled), also using
>> gzip-static.in nginx (cache-io doesn't quite cut it in cherokee)
>> I found the cache too aggressive in cherokee, if I upload a newer file
>> I'd still keep serving the the cached file for a while (I wasn't
>> actually sure when it actually expired).. so I manually lowered the
>> expiry time for the cache (900secs), performance dives :/
>> Okay a quick break down of the stats..
>> Nginx-generated traffic is cut in half (thanks to gzip-static) vs Cherokee
>> Nginx: 118Mb Ram, Cherokee: 260Mb
>> CPU: nginx is by-far using less, that race isn't even close.
>> A break down, http://i.imgur.com/JVO1w.png
>> Both web servers packages are compiled on ubuntu 11.04/openvz hosting.
>> Cherokee mailing list
>> Cherokee at lists.octality.com
> Cherokee mailing list
> Cherokee at lists.octality.com
More information about the nginx