no performance improvement on nginx reverse-proxy

[SplitIce]

The only time you will see a performance increase from nginx as a reverse
proxy is when you need features that apache does badly like keep alive.

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Cliff Wells <cliff at develix.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 12:33 +0800, yung wrote:
>
> > After testing for some times (have been changing the arugments for
> > http_load), I found nginx with reverse-proxy is not better than the
> > realserver.
> > Even the result is worse for accessing nginx than access apache directly.
>
> > So how do you think about it?
> > Suggestions are welcome. Thanks.
> >
>
> If you use a Ferrari to tow a dump truck, you will find that the dump
> truck actually goes slightly faster on its own.
> In short, there are so many bottlenecks in your test setup (Apache, CGI,
> database) that the speed differences you see are probably not even
> statistically significant.
>
> Further, it's not clear at all why you think adding additional layers of
> processing (a proxy) to your stack would somehow magically speed things
> up.   *Of course* it will be slower.   How could you ever expect
> anything different?   The typical use-case of Nginx in front of Apache
> is to allow Nginx to serve static resources to take the load away from
> Apache.   You could also use some of Nginx' caching features to take
> load off Apache.   You did none of these things.   I think you need to
> think harder about what you are testing.
>
> Regards,
> Cliff
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nginx mailing list
> nginx at nginx.org
> http://nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nginx.org/pipermail/nginx/attachments/20101013/243cf837/attachment.html>