[Cherokee] Benchmarks of cherokee vs nginx

Cliff Wells cliff at develix.com
Tue May 24 18:48:19 MSD 2011

On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 07:39 -0700, Cliff Wells wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 09:25 -0500, Tony Zakula wrote:
> > I am not complaining about OpenVZ.  I deploy servers on a regular
> > basis using OpenVZ.  I also deploy using KVM, and others.  There is a
> > massive difference between OpenVZ and KVM in implementation, system
> > stability, etc.  They are entirely different animals.  You cannot
> > discount the hypervisor.  The hypervisor can make or break your
> > application depending on how you're application is structured.  For
> > instance, Java apps run great on KVM hypervisors, but really poor if
> > at all on OpenVZ unless you tune the OpenVZ instance to meet your Java
> > apps needs.  The reason for that is the way Java handles memory.
> > Threads is another big issue hypervisors. To say that the hypervisor
> > has no effect on application performance is not accurate at all.
> So are you suggesting no benchmark is ever valid unless it is run on
> every hypervisor available as well as on the bare metal?  Clearly every
> benchmark has defined parameters, and in this case OpenVZ was one of
> those parameters.
> So long as the benchmark is defined as "Nginx vs Cherokee under OpenVZ"
> then it's a perfectly valid benchmark.

Let me clarify that last sentence: there are other issues that might
invalidate this benchmark (should be run on a dedicated LAN and on a
dedicated node at least), but the virtualization (or lack of) isn't one
of those factors.


More information about the nginx mailing list