Forum: NGINX Is anyone else amazed at how many people use nginx on Windows?

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
Michael S. (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 01:45
(Received via mailing list)
I mean.... really?

If you're looking for performance, is Windows really your target OS?
and security?

Not to mention things like php-fpm don't exist...

I've been surprised at the demand for nginx on Windows. I figure
people running nginx are looking for a high performance solution, and
why anyone would run Windows for python/perl/php/fastcgi stuff makes
me very confused. I'd only run Windows if I needed .NET/ASP/something
Windows-y.

Oh well :)
Nuno Magalhães (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 02:01
(Received via mailing list)
> If you're looking for performance, is Windows really your target OS?
> and security?

You might be responsible for the webserver, but not the OS.
Security-wise dunno, but i've heard good things about Server 2007 in
general. Personally i wouldn't use Redmond stuff unless i had no other
choice.

> Not to mention things like php-fpm don't exist...
Isn't there CLI PHP? Hmm... you'd need a daemon for that...

> I've been surprised at the demand for nginx on Windows. I figure
> people running nginx are looking for a high performance solution, and
> why anyone would run Windows for python/perl/php/fastcgi stuff makes
> me very confused. I'd only run Windows if I needed .NET/ASP/something
> Windows-y.

Like i said, the webadmin might have no say on the OS. Or they may be
brainwashed, not uncommon, i had a classmate (computer Engineering!!)
that told me last week he didn't try linux 'cos it wasn't
user-friendly... I asked him if he ever had tried, maybe Ubuntu or
anthing gnome... No, he'd never tried it. It's a sad but true example,
some people are taught to be mouse engineers and all they see is the
winlogo. Alas...

Cheers,
Nuno Magalhães
Resicow (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 02:01
(Received via mailing list)
Igor,

Don't waste your time on the Windows build. Concentrate on making nginx
better and better on Linux.

nginx is by far the best, and keeps getting better and better. Making
everything work on windows will just slow you down.

It is amazing how great a product you have developed, and I have loved
watching the progress, and I love using your server.

If you are using nginx on Windows, then you are an idiot. Go away and
use apache or IIS.

John
Cliff W. (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 02:05
(Received via mailing list)
While I tend to agree with the general sentiment, I don't think it's
necessary to insult people over their choice of technology.

Regards,
Cliff
Nuno Magalhães (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 02:14
(Received via mailing list)
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 22:54, Resicow <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> 
wrote:
> Igor,
>
> Don't waste your time on the Windows build. Concentrate on making nginx
> better and better on Linux.

If he makes it ISO/ANSI, all it takes is a volunteer to compile. I'd
say *nix, not Linux. Also... better, bigger more feature-filled...
then what? A new apache? A KISS approach is always welcomed.

> nginx is by far the best, and keeps getting better and better. Making
> everything work on windows will just slow you down.

That's his call. See above.

> If you are using nginx on Windows, then you are an idiot. Go away and use
> apache or IIS.

Grow up.
AMP Admin (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 02:24
(Received via mailing list)
YES! FORGET WINDOWS SUPPORT!  Let's make the best even better.
Resi C. (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 02:25
(Received via mailing list)
Yeah it is his call, but now all you have are people complaining and
whining
that their windows build doesn't work.

You want to keep it simple? Keep the windows people away.

Unless you are planning on building a full GUI for nginx. Without a GUI,
windows people start to cry.

2009/5/6 Nuno Magalhães <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>
Nuno Magalhães (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 02:31
(Received via mailing list)
These must be trolls...
Resi C. (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 02:40
(Received via mailing list)
Yes, lets have a vote. Lets vote to END windows support.

+1 to end support.

No I understand why you would want windows support. nginx is the best,
and
bringing nginx to windows just opens the server up to a larger user
base.
BUT that user base *should* come to *nix if they want nginx. We all know
*nix is better.

2009/5/6 Nuno Magalhães <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>
Michael S. (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 02:42
(Received via mailing list)
Yeah, I did not mean to start a flame war. Obviously this will bring
up the religious windows vs. linux/unix. I just found it quite
interesting so many people were interested and seemed to be expecting
the native Windows release.

I do slightly disagree though. Sure, a developer might not have OS
selection options and the system administrator ultimately makes the
call, butif you're able to make a decision not he webserver being
used, you should have some influence on the OS too.

I did try the nginx that Kevin(?) built I believe was his name (sorry
if I forgot your name dude) on my laptop so I could develop
locally/remotely, but then I realized for PHP support I'v ebeen
relying on php-fpm, and I had no clue how to get PHP going under
fastcgi on Windows...

I wound up using XAMPP or something and just kept the work I did simple.
Kevin W. (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 03:17
(Received via mailing list)
I am thankful to Igor for all of his hard work and the time he's spent
to deliver a lightweight web server.

Being a person from a windows AND linux background, I appreciate the
effort put into the Windows side. Before these native builds, I was
compiling and providing my Cygwin builds to the Windows crowd for
exactly the reason that

--
Kevin W.
Kevin W. (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 03:24
(Received via mailing list)
(cont'd) Before these native builds, I was compiling and
> providing my Cygwin builds to the Windows crowd for exactly the reason that Michael 
mentioned: to be able to develop on Windows locally, using a light web server that's 
simple to get up and running.

So as an Nginx enthusiast from both worlds, I ask you not to troll.
Nginx is great software, and if Igor wants to concentrate on spreading
it to as many platforms as possible, I am all for it. Likewise, I
would not be upset if he concentrates solely on *nix - I will continue
with my Cygwin builds/setup packages for Windows. That is the beauty
of open source software - developers can concentrate on whatever
they'd like, and if a niche exists elsewhere, someone else will fill
it, if so inclined.

Thanks for reading,
Kevin
--
Kevin W.




On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Kevin W.
Darrin Chandler (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 03:31
(Received via mailing list)
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 04:54:43PM -0500, Resicow wrote:
> Don't waste your time on the Windows build. Concentrate on making nginx
> better and better on Linux.

Or don't waste time on Linux, and just stick with BSD where it all
started.

> nginx is by far the best, and keeps getting better and better. Making
> everything work on windows will just slow you down.

Why let all the Linuxisms and GNUisms slow you down. Stick with BSD.

> It is amazing how great a product you have developed, and I have loved
> watching the progress, and I love using your server.
>
> If you are using nginx on Windows, then you are an idiot. Go away and
> use apache or IIS.

If you are using nginx on Linux, then you are...

Ok, enough. You should have gotten the point by now.

I'm no fan of Windows, and I don't give a hoot if nginx is ever
available on Windows. But it's also way out of line to tell Igor and
anyone else how to spend their time. I'm just glad nginx was written,
and new features added, and supported here by Igor and others, all
available under a great license.
Cliff W. (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 03:56
(Received via mailing list)
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 17:31 -0500, Resi C. wrote:
> Yes, lets have a vote. Lets vote to END windows support.
>
> +1 to end support.

I wasn't aware Igor had elected to make the direction of Nginx
development a democracy.   Until such time as he does, the only "vote"
you get is to use and modify the source code he provides in whatever way
you wish.   It doesn't give you the right to dictate how others use and
modify that code.  It certainly doesn't give you the right to dictate to
Igor himself what he should or shouldn't work on.

My vote is to let Igor continue to do the fine job he's done to date.
If he feels a Windows port is worth having, then I wish him luck.

Cliff
Resi C. (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 04:11
(Received via mailing list)
Ha ha, you guys are so serious. Calm down.

First, Igor doesn't have to listen to me, not did I ever tell him to
stop
windows development.

He can do whatever he wants, he is the king of nginx, the best server
software on the planet.

I was just saying that if Igor has "limited" time to work on nginx (i.e.
he
can't work 24/7 on it), and if windows development is going to cause a
lot
of pain and hassle, then is it really work it?

If it is great, it is up to him, he is the man. Nobody said otherwise.

My vote is just a vote, don't you get the sarcasm. He doesn't have to
listen
to me, nor do I expect him to. It's not a democracy, it is up to him. I
have
NO problem with that.

What I will do is continue to use his great software, and report bugs or
other problems as I run into them, to continue to help him make the best
server software... period.

You just won't see me using nginx on Windows anytime soon ;-).

Okay so can we have a new vote to END replies to this thread!

We all love nginx here, so lets all chill and have a drink.
Cliff W. (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 04:20
(Received via mailing list)
On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 19:04 -0500, Resi C. wrote:

>
> We all love nginx here, so lets all chill and have a drink.

+1 on that.

Cliff
Jim O. (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 04:20
(Received via mailing list)
I think what people were unhappy with was not your "vote" but your
statement that "If you are using nginx on Windows, then you are an
idiot. Go away and
use apache or IIS".

You should grow up.

That said, I agree, this has run its course.
Resi C. (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 04:29
(Received via mailing list)
Peace...

Okay new vote... if you download nginx for windows you have to donate:

http://sysoev.ru/en/donation.html

Ha ha no I am joking, have a great night everyone!
郭振立 (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 07:15
(Received via mailing list)
> me very confused. I'd only run Windows if I needed .NET/ASP/something
> Windows-y.
>
> Oh well :)
>


I need windows version. NO WHY.



That's my answer.



Regards,



Robert Kwok
张立冰 (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 08:51
(Received via mailing list)
Funny. :)

And I think there is no need.

2009/5/7 郭振立 <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>
Delta Y. (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 09:37
(Received via mailing list)
郭振立 <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>,
Why not use virtual machine to run nginx  as a reverse proxy ?

Igor,

I agree that you don't need to spend too much time on windows port.

Keep focus  and succeed.

2009/5/7 郭振立 <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>
Matt Lewandowsky (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 13:19
(Received via mailing list)
"Michael S." <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote on Wednesday, May 06, 
2009 at
2:37 PM:

> me very confused. I'd only run Windows if I needed .NET/ASP/something
> Windows-y.
>
> Oh well :)

Personally, a native build of nginx on Windows is interesting to me.
There
are no good, small native httpds which are capable of IPv6 at this time.
As
I don't do Cygwin, that version was uninteresting to me. I was looking
into
the feasibility of getting it to run under either UWIN and/or Interix
(aka
SFU/SUA), as those are my normal POSIXy environments on Windows
machines. I
have a number of Windows machines that I occasionally want to put static
content on, which only are reachable via IPv6, and IIS is seriously too
heavy for static content. So, if Igor's build works, and well, I'm all
for
it. Of course, it'd be better if we could build it ourselves for any
customizations which one would like, but meh.

Anyhow, that's my 2 cents, whatever they're worth in the current global
economy.

Warmest,

--Matt
Jim O. (Guest)
on 2009-05-07 20:44
(Received via mailing list)
My goodness. I agree, this was a legitimate question/statement on Mike's
part. I'll admit I am surprised. I use Windows on my desktop machine to
run some native Windows apps for my business. I also run Linux on the
same box for lots of other things. My laptop is a MacBook Pro. All of my
servers run Linux. It works best for my purposes at this time. If I were
to start over I might use FreeBSD but that's a war I don't want to start
on this list. It would, however, make the crowd in Redmond happy to see
people fighting over *nix system choices, yet some would call you an
"idiot" for choosing Linux over BSD for an OS.

Calling someone "an idiot" for their choice of technology is like
calling someone an idiot for their politics or for their religion.

The is *clearly* a demand for a Windows version. Igor is developing it
for his own reasons. Unless you are signing his paychecks, the only
"vote" that counts is Igor's.

Posted at Nginx Forum:
http://forum.nginx.org/read.php?2,1816,1829#msg-1829
Trigun (Guest)
on 2009-05-09 00:29
(Received via mailing list)
In my case, I do the majority of web development testing on my local pc
prior to pushing it to a production server.
It is useful to have a similar server setup locally as to what you will
be using full scale and in that regard a native implementation of nginx
is very helpful.

I personally don't care to run VMs 24/7 just to run a local web server
for testing. Again I appreciate the ability to have a similar server
setup locally as to what I use on my *nix box, so using IIS/Apache by
themselves doesn't really help my cause. Therefor whatever improvements
Igor does regarding the windows buids are very much appreciated by
myself and I'm sure many others.

Posted at Nginx Forum:
http://forum.nginx.org/read.php?2,1816,1869#msg-1869
Hendry Lee (Guest)
on 2009-05-12 19:27
(Received via mailing list)
I'm just a lurker so far, but this issue may impact the future of nginx,
which I do care about so I'll give this a shot. Feel free to disregard
this if you wish.

I am with others who think that a Windows port of nginx may be useful,
but Igor should NOT spend too much time on it. Ok, I lie. I think
Windows port should be left outside of the primary nginx effort.

Unless of course, he has some agenda or commercial purpose behind it.
For that, I think no one should interfere with that decision, although I
personally think that building commercial company using nginx under
opensource platform is a better alternative.

nginx is a wonderful piece of software. We are thankful for that..

With that said, I really can't think of a way why nginx should natively
support Windows. Most people here use it for testing and web
development. (Or are there big sites out there running nginx under
Windows?)

A lot of people appreciate the small memory footprint and use nginx for
development platform. I myself have created VMware image loaded with
nginx and WordPress for WP developers and written an article on how to
setup nginx on Windows for testing WordPress.

But let's think about it. What nginx is REALLY for?

I think nginx is a great software to build high traffic web servers, and
other features that I haven't used yet. And by porting to Windows
natively, this wastes time that otherwise could be used to further
improve nginx in this direction.

There are still a lot of sites that could have saved a lot by migrating
to nginx. As nginx grows, people will be attracted to the stability and
features added by the software. It is a much BETTER idea to focus on
this instead of serving a need for Windows users, which account for a
small portion of the nginx community, not to mention that it was not
what it was designed to be.

Developing for Windows can only slow things down. And I think this is a
BAD decision. Nginx can't satisfy everyone, nor should it try to. At
least the time has not come yet for that kind of expansion. Let me
elaborate.

Satisfying some developers who want to save a bit of memory under
Windows will only hurt the software in the long run because like it or
not this list has to support the whole new beast. That's (close to) a
full time job, I think.

That's my 2 cents...
AMP Admin (Guest)
on 2009-05-14 08:24
(Received via mailing list)
Moving another apache server to nginx :)

Can I get some help with this rewrite??

RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} !^/index.php
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI}
(/|\.php|\.html|\.htm|\.feed|\.pdf|\.raw|/[^.]*)$  [NC]
RewriteRule (.*) index.php
RewriteRule .* - [E=HTTP_AUTHORIZATION:%{HTTP:Authorization},L]
AMP Admin (Guest)
on 2009-05-14 08:26
(Received via mailing list)
Oh and one more please!!!

DirectoryIndex index.php

<FilesMatch "\.(php|inc)$">
Order allow,deny
deny from all
</FilesMatch>
<FilesMatch "(index.php|dl.php|ut.php|lt.php|download.php)$">
Order allow,deny
allow from all
</FilesMatch>
Igor S. (Guest)
on 2009-05-14 09:22
(Received via mailing list)
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:13:21PM -0500, AMP Admin wrote:

> Moving another apache server to nginx :)
>
> Can I get some help with this rewrite??
>
> RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f
> RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d
> RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} !^/index.php
> RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} (/|\.php|\.html|\.htm|\.feed|\.pdf|\.raw|/[^.]*)$  [NC]
> RewriteRule (.*) index.php
> RewriteRule .* - [E=HTTP_AUTHORIZATION:%{HTTP:Authorization},L]

   location = /index.php {
       fastcgi_pass    ...;
   }

   location ~ (/|\.php|\.html?|\.feed|\.pdf|\.raw|/[^.]+)$ {
       try_files  $uri  $uri/  /index.php;

       fastcgi_pass    ...;
   }
Igor S. (Guest)
on 2009-05-14 09:30
(Received via mailing list)
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:18:39PM -0500, AMP Admin wrote:

> allow from all
> </FilesMatch>

Probably you need just

  location ~ \.inc$ {
     deny all;
  }

because .php will be handled by fastcgi only.
Claude B. (Guest)
on 2009-05-14 18:34
(Received via mailing list)
Hello!  I have a question.

I'm trying to set up Nginx to forward my old domain to my new domain.
waterfortheoppressed.com => wfto.cc.   But I not only need it to forward
it,
I need the persons browser address to change to wfto.cc.  I'll provide
the
working Apache example here:

   RewriteEngine On
   RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^(waterfortheoppressed.com) [NC]
   RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.wfto.cc$1 [R=301,L]

   RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^(www.waterfortheoppressed.com) [NC]
   RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.wfto.cc$1 [R=301,L]

Thanks for any help you may have.
Denis F. Latypoff (Guest)
on 2009-05-14 18:46
(Received via mailing list)
Hello Claude,

Thursday, May 14, 2009, 9:23:55 PM, you wrote:

> Hello!  I have a question.

> I'm trying to set up Nginx to forward my old domain to my new domain.
> waterfortheoppressed.com => wfto.cc.   But I not only need it to forward it,
> I need the persons browser address to change to wfto.cc.  I'll provide the
> working Apache example here:

>    RewriteEngine On
>    RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^(waterfortheoppressed.com) [NC]
>    RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.wfto.cc$1 [R=301,L]

>    RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^(www.waterfortheoppressed.com) [NC]
>    RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.wfto.cc$1 [R=301,L]

> Thanks for any help you may have.

server {
       listen 80;
       server_name www.waterfortheoppressed.com
                       waterfortheoppressed.com;
       # staff
}

server {
       listen 80;
       server_name _;

       location / {
              rewrite ^ http://www.wfto.cc$request_uri? permanent;
       }
}
Igor S. (Guest)
on 2009-05-14 19:08
(Received via mailing list)
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 09:38:49PM +0700, Denis F. Latypoff wrote:

>
>        listen 80;
>               rewrite ^ http://www.wfto.cc$request_uri? permanent;
>        }
> }

Vice versa:

 server {
        listen 80;
        server_name www.waterfortheoppressed.com
                        waterfortheoppressed.com;

        rewrite ^ http://www.wfto.cc$request_uri? permanent;
 }

 server {
        listen 80;
        server_name www.wfto.cc;

        # staff
 }
Denis F. Latypoff (Guest)
on 2009-05-14 19:47
(Received via mailing list)
Hello Igor,

Thursday, May 14, 2009, 9:56:19 PM, you wrote:

> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 09:38:49PM +0700, Denis F. Latypoff wrote:

>>
>>        listen 80;
>>               rewrite ^ http://www.wfto.cc$request_uri? permanent;
>>        }
>> }

> Vice versa:

>  server {
>         listen 80;
>         server_name www.waterfortheoppressed.com
>                         waterfortheoppressed.com;

>         rewrite ^ http://www.wfto.cc$request_uri? permanent;
>  }
>
>  server {
>         listen 80;
>         server_name www.wfto.cc;

>         # staff
>  }

That was additional homework for Claude :)
Claude B. (Guest)
on 2009-05-14 20:21
(Received via mailing list)
Thank you very much, will try to get this working now.

2009/5/14 Denis F. Latypoff <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>

> >> > Hello!  I have a question.
> >> >    RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.wfto.cc$1 [R=301,L]
> >>        # staff
>
> >  server {
>  Denis                            mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid
>
>
>


--

Vince
Lombardi<http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/v/vince_...
- "We didn't lose the game; we just ran out of time."
Claude B. (Guest)
on 2009-05-14 20:54
(Received via mailing list)
Firefox says: REDIRECT LOOP  Firefox has detected that the server is
redirecting the request for this address in a way that will never
complete.

lol.

It's only when I use www.wfto.cc, and not wfto.cc.

Figured it out while writing this e-mail.  Make sure that when you use
those
rewrite rules that you actually have a server named www.whatever.com, or
it
will end up in a redirect loop.

Thanks again,

Claude

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 6:12 PM, Claude B. 
<removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:

>> >> Hello Claude,
>> >> > working Apache example here:
>> >> server {
>> >>        location / {
>>
>> That was additional homework for Claude :)
>
> Vince Lombardi<http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/v/vince_... - "We 
didn't lose the game; we just ran out of time."




--

Don Marquis
<http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/d/don_ma...
- "Procrastination is the art of keeping up with yesterday."
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.