Apache debate

[jlangevin]

While reading articles over the weekend about Nginx, I found a few of
the typical Nginx vs Apache benchmarks.
In every benchmark, someone always showed up to defend Apache's
appalling performance, and claim that Apache has a ton of modules
enabled by default in it's configuration file, which should be removed
for a production system regardless.

That's a fine argument, and seems very likely true (but then it should
be documented in the config file exactly which module is needed for
what), but my question is, doesn't Nginx have a number of modules
compiled in for extra functionality? At least, in a system binary on
Ubuntu for instance?

I installed Nginx from Apt on Ubuntu, so that is a pre-compiled binary
(I assume with all features enabled), whereas I compiled Nginx for
Centos, without multiple modules, such as Server Side Includes.

So it seems to stand to reason that Nginx is typically being benchmarked
with a variety of modules enabled by default as well. Granted, not as
numerous as Apache, but still multiple modules, and is not running at
it's own peak efficiency either in most benchmarks.


To be rid of the Nginx detractors, it would be nice to see a benchmark
with Nginx & only X list of modules, and Apache with X list of modules,
to produce roughly the same functionality (ability) between each
installation, and then benchmark each.
I should think that would remove anyone's arguments :-)


Cheers

Posted at Nginx Forum: http://forum.nginx.org/read.php?2,127919,127919#msg-127919