Free/Cheap -> Fast WebServer Setup

Outdoor

As I can see, LiteSpeed is the number 1 choice for fast web servers.
But enterprise edition is expensive for start-up.

This is interesant: https://hostedtalk.net/t/litespeed-servers-publishing-fake-benchmarks/4431

Can we get similar performance with Apache + LSapi, as Litespeed enterprise?

Or OpenLiteSpeed, the main problem is .httaccess support, but DA has a cron that you can run like every 3 mins and it’ll check for any changes to .htaccess files, then if it sees one it’ll reload OLS.
LSCache for WP/etc work as well
Can we do something similar with Cpanel?

Or is there any other option to get an fast web server?

If I chose Cpanel, what will be the best choice:
Apache + LSAPI
Open LiteSpeed + some cron job for .httacess
Nginx
Something other?

From the server resource side.
Will LiteSpeed reduce the load of the server in relation to Nginx?

Best Regards

skorupion

litespeed is amazing because it requires almost no config and can easily run hundreds small websites on a small dedi

donko

for selling host:

-Not all customers like nginx
-Apache hosting sounds ehm.. low end
-Openlitespeed is going generate you a lot of support tickets as ONLY support rewrite rules in htaccess
-Litespeed enterprise is okay for marketing terms shared environments

for personal usage:

• nginx or openlitespeed (i prefer OLS for WP)

JasonM

for your personal use: nginx would be better.
for your clients: Open LiteSpeed + some cron job for .httacess

laoban

What about Nginx (Proxy) + Apache?

Outdoor

@skorupion said:
litespeed is amazing because it requires almost no config and can easily run hundreds small websites on a small dedi

Is it same with open lite speed?
Just that .htaccess...

@JasonM said:
for your personal use: nginx would be better.
for your clients: Open LiteSpeed + some cron job for .httacess

All sites are from people that i know, but it will be very nice if i can setup that cron via cpanel.
Do you have any idea how to do it?

@laoban said:
What about Nginx (Proxy) + Apache?

How will it performe vs LiteSpeed?
Also, will it take more server resources?

WebProject

@Outdoor said: How will it performe vs LiteSpeed?
Also, will it take more server resources?

it depends how you will setup.

vero

@Outdoor said:

Can we get similar performance with Apache + LSapi, as Litespeed enterprise?

I've tested load times about two years ago (and I believe I still have numbers somewhere): Apache with PHP-FPM, Apache with mod_lsapi (in CL) and LiteSpeed - all results were close, but LiteSpeed subjectively felt the fastest.

Or OpenLiteSpeed, the main problem is .httaccess support, but DA has a cron that you can run like every 3 mins and it’ll check for any changes to .htaccess files, then if it sees one it’ll reload OLS.

Reloading OLS is the least concern. Because .htaccess usually includes much more than just rewrite rules, that OLS should support. And when paid for LiteSpeed Enterprise you don't have to search why something doesn't work and how to make it OLS compatible. Everything just works. BTW, I'm running both of these, but OLS only for personal and side projects.

bruh21

nginx+apache if you're cheap

pedagang

cheaper... varnish + apache

always depend who you are

and

do benchmark yourself....

Tony40

Apache +FastCGI .. amazing!

ailice

Apache and Litespeed, No hassle work.

pedagang

@Tony40 said:
Apache +FastCGI .. amazing!

offcourse php-fpm

Outdoor

Too many different suggestions

But Nginx gets most of the votes.

FoxelVox

Still waiting on the day for DA to come with webserver selectors

It shouldn’t be that hard to do actually if you setup a reverse proxy infront like haproxy;

HAPROXY -> varnish+apache or varnish+nginx, nginx cache+apache or nginx cache+apache, Apache, NGINX, LiteSpeed, openlitespeed, caddy etc

giang

OpenLiteSpeed is very super simple to config even if you don't have any Control Panel.

When I used nginx, I have to reload the nginx if I made any changes. The same with OpenLiteSpeed and .htaccess, or we don't need to restart nginx anymore?

OLS got their own LSPHP, that would make you even more easier to use PHP website.

pedagang

uh oh
**cpanel **support nginx (proxy) + apache --- php-fpm etc
it is the best for most common user

Levi

As I repeat very often: use apache. Your traffic is irrelevant to justify other, more complicated, web server usage.

Fritz

I would prefer Apache + nginx.

1. Easier to setup (for me)
2. Lower load for my server (based on my experience)
3. Cheaper, yes a lot cheaper than LS Enterprise (since it is free)
4. No headache for htaccess and url rewrite for sure

Both my DA and Plesk server uses this config.

desperand

@vero said: I've tested load times about two years ago (and I believe I still have numbers somewhere): Apache with PHP-FPM, Apache with mod_lsapi (in CL) and LiteSpeed - all results were close, but LiteSpeed subjectively felt the fastest.

I did awful testing to close open question for myself, that sounds like:

"What is faster right now for me? nginx+php-fpm, apache + php, nginx + apache + php, or openlitespeed?".

Answer that I got after testing: OpenLiteSpeed surprised me with results (rps, and overall visual feeling while interaction with heavy WP website (without caching plugins)).

That's all about positive points.

**Now going to negative ones:
**

1. OLS immensely bugged app. Just fucking extremely damn bugged. The difference with LiteSpeed = not adequate. They said they use +- the same codebase, but I do not believe in that. OLS just a piece of shit with hundreds of bugs. Just fucking hundreds of bugs here and there. Almost everywhere. With sessions, with memory allocation, with different incorrect behavior on their configs, etc etc. And every new version provides new bugs. And there are no easy methods to report bugs or ask devs to fix them.

OpenLiteSpeed bugs - piss me fucking off way too much. Sorry for cursing, but without emotions and bad words impossible to explain how damn stupid that thing is. OLS fast, but bugged as hell.

I've used OLS stand-alone and as a part of CyberPanel for three years for sure.
I eat a lot of shit because of OLS. The bugs that happened to OLS drive me crazy because they're different. You wake up because of a notification that the website does not work, you start analyzing what happened, and you see no disk space. You ask yourself: "wtf happened." And then you realize that again OLS store some data because of the bug to the disk drive and don't prune it, while they must to do that. As a result, you have tons of garbage, and impossible to do anything, even removing the app, or turning it off, because not enough space and their demons keep creating files and make busy IOPS...

Bugs with htaccess, bugs with their caching, when ALL websites cached by default (dynamic -> static) while there are no rules enabled for that. And you forced like an idiot to put .htaccess to all directories and tell OLS not to cache the dir.

Like sessions problems, when you wake up, you see 19GB of sessions in the PHP folder, while yesterday there was around 30MB.

Like exposing the .git folder to the public, while there was a rule that not do that.

Like strange and hard to describe and understand issues with closed connection or refused connection

And an awful thing is when a bug happens, you have absolutely NO instruments to trace and debug where is the problem comes from properly.

OLS logs are impossible to read by normal humans. Hard to google, hard to understand their documentation, etc etc.

With Nginx, things are much more manageable.
I hope OLS will fix their bugs and improve their QA department to release better code that is tested one day. Because I believe that they do not even try code at all before release, they write, and they see that their app can be compiled. Compiled? No warnings? No errors? Ok, it's stable and good -> release.

Because I've seen a lot of childish bugs...

And again, my negative towards OLS NOT related to Litespeed.
Litespeed is another universe.

qerdan

@Outdoor please bookmark the official benchmark, Nginx is the winner:

https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/174082/nginx-is-100x-faster-than-litespeed-for-wordpress

---> Nginx approximately 100x faster than Litespeed. And Nginx is approximately 1000x easier config than setting up bloated Litespeed and .htaccess files junk.... remember that Litespeed used Unix sockets which is very slow, you must fix all their bad config during setup, Nginx just save your favorite config template and use shell.

Also .htaccess is a devil file that hackers love to use for malware attacks, why use it??

https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/171638/openlitespeed-vs-nginx-for-static-caching/p1

https://www.danielmorell.com/guides/htaccess-seo/basics/dont-use-htaccess-unless-you-must

301 redirects using a WP plugin is better. Server config should be private location.

If you want #1 easy use Nginx + WP Multisite and all your customers cannot play with .htaccess rules and cannot play with WordPress master settings also

vero

@qerdan said:

---> Nginx approximately 100x faster than Litespeed. And Nginx is approximately 1000x easier config than setting up bloated Litespeed and .htaccess files junk.... remember that Litespeed used Unix sockets which is very slow, you must fix all their bad config during setup, Nginx just save your favorite config template and use shell.

Also .htaccess is a devil file that hackers love to use for malware attacks, why use it??

I think template looks ok, just below line is missing:

Kindly do inform me if a bug bounty reward would be given for the responsible disclosure of this issue.