Forum: Ruby on Rails Apache vs. Lighttpd

Announcement (2017-05-07): is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see and for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
cool_screen_name90001 (Guest)
on 2005-11-17 23:05
(Received via mailing list)
I'm a long time user of Apache - first 1.3.x and then 2.x for about two
years now I guess. People
seem to be raving about Lighttpd, and, from what I've read, it appears
to perform much better than
Apache, especially with lots of connections*.
Is Lighttpd easier to configure, setup, etc.? Any other compelling
reasons to switch to it? I feel
like I have a lot of stuff added in to Apache (various mods, mod_rewrite
rules, etc.) - maybe use
them both in parallel?


* Yesterday I received over 20,000 visits from Googlebot to one site,
and many more hits to other
sites from Googlebot and other bots - server load was around 8-10 most
of the day. (These sites
don't use much caching - client or server side - but I plan on switching
them to Rails and
utilizing its caching).
billkatz (Guest)
on 2005-11-17 23:29
(Received via mailing list)
I'm using lighttpd and it's very easy to configure for Rails use.
As for performance, you can read one case of Apache vs lighttpd at

Regards, Bill
miles.wu (Guest)
on 2005-11-17 23:56
(Received via mailing list)
Support for mod_proxy's rewriting rules in lighttpd is lacking.
Mod_spelling, mod_svn are both missing.

Apart from that I have found no reason to use apache any more. Lighttpd
faster, less of a memory hog and it is very easy to configure. The main
thing I like about lighttpd is its conditional based config file. You
even do nested conditionals, which allows you to do somethings you can't
in apache (like forcing a certain virtual host to use a https

For example to do a virtual host you do:

$HTTP['host'] =~ 'some regex expression' {
some stuff
like server.document-root = /some/where/else
or a fastcgi thing

hipertracker (Guest)
on 2005-11-18 02:01
(Received via mailing list)
2005/11/17, Miles Wu <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>:

> Support for mod_proxy's rewriting rules in lighttpd is lacking.

It has mod_proxy module but it is very limited if compared to Apache.
It has also mod_rewrite but again it is very limited if compared to
Apache. E.g. there is no way for using lighttpd instead of Apache for
Zope/Plone. mod_rewrite can map only to local url. And mod_rewrite can
map only to IP instead of full URL.. I am using Plone with several
virtual hosts and one IP. Lighttpd cannot do
RewriteRule ^/(.*) http://host.domain:8080/$1 [P,L]
ProxyPass /  http://host.domain:8080/

stoyan (Guest)
on 2005-11-18 04:13
(Received via mailing list)
> Mod_spelling, mod_svn are both missing.
> ...
> Support for mod_proxy's rewriting rules in lighttpd is lacking.

We are usually combining it with reverse proxy (pound) - [ ].
lighttpd (and apache if needed for something - svn etc.) started on, different ports. Based on url pound forward requests to
lighttpd or apache (or even resin for java stuff). Helps also with
load balancing/failover detection. Also pound handle all HTTPS stuff,
so even web servers with missing support for it (https) are OK.
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.