Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Apache 2.4 Comes Out As Web Server On Steroids

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,294

    Default Apache 2.4 Comes Out As Web Server On Steroids

    Phoronix: Apache 2.4 Comes Out As Web Server On Steroids

    The Apache Software Foundation officially released the Apache 2.4 today as the first major update to this leading open-source web-server in more than a half-decade. Apache 2.4 is slated to deliver superior performance to its 2.2 predecessor and better compete with the growingly-popular NGINX web-server...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTA2MDQ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    384

    Default

    Release early, release often? ;-)

  3. #3

    Default

    Besides much faster performance...
    Where do you read that? There is very little about performance in the release notes.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oibaf View Post
    Where do you read that? There is very little about performance in the release notes.
    Here, for instance: https://people.apache.org/~jim/preso...ttpd_cloud.pdf

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1

    Default Apache Foundation avoids real benchmarks in favor of marketing

    Quote Originally Posted by jabl View Post
    That benchmark is as uninteresting as it is misleading. Problems I note right away:

    1) No tuning was done. If this is absolutely true, then we must assume Nginx was performing with only 1 worker (the default). That means Nginx only utilized a single core and kept up with Apache using multiple cores. If it's not true, then we need to know what tuning was done for each server.

    2) Without a graph of CPU and memory utilization, this is a very one-dimensional benchmark. It *does* matter if Apache is using 1GB of RAM and 90% of CPU and Nginx is using only 20MB and 20% CPU (making up numbers, since the benchmark provided none).

    3) Under "Caveats", it's noted that "Apache is never resource-starved". Of course, this is the exact scenario that people considering Apache vs Nginx should be considering and that the benchmark skips over altogether (providing graphs for (1) would have given some clue about this). Apache (like most software) works fine when it has tons of resources to consume. The reason people have been moving to Nginx isn't because Apache is slow, it's because Apache tends to consume lots of RAM, and once it's done that, "thundering herd syndrome" sets in and brings the entire thing to its knees in short order. The fact that *this* issue is the primary drive to Nginx (and other lightweight HTTP servers) and the benchmark specifically avoids it, I can't help but think that the biggest change in Apache 2.4 is the number.

    I'd really like to see an independent 3rd party (hint-hint, Phoronix) provide more useful metrics. What the Apache Foundation has been spreading appears to me to be mostly marketing materials. I'd be shocked if they didn't have real benchmarks that arose during the development of 2.4, but I've yet to see them. That's doesn't seem reassuring.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •