# Nginx-0.7.52 **URL:** \ **Category:** NGINX\ **Created:** [April 20, 2009, 8:46am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942 "2009-04-20T08:46:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 8:46am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/1 "2009-04-20T08:46:34Z")
Changes with nginx 0.7.52 20 Apr 2009 ``` *) Feature: the first native Windows binary release. *) Bugfix: in processing HEAD method while caching. *) Bugfix: in processing the "If-Modified-Since", "If-Range", etc. client request header lines while caching. *) Bugfix: now the "Set-Cookie" and "P3P" header lines are hidden in cacheable responses. *) Bugfix: if nginx was built with the ngx_http_perl_module and with ``` a perl which supports threads, then during a master process exit the message “panic: MUTEX\_LOCK” might be issued. ``` *) Bugfix: nginx could not be built --without-http-cache; the bug ``` had appeared in 0.7.48. ``` *) Bugfix: nginx could not be built on platforms different from ``` i386, amd64, sparc, and ppc; the bug had appeared in 0.7.42. ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 9:21am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/2 "2009-04-20T09:21:08Z")
Is there a special way to start the windows version? Double-clicking did nothing, and running from a prompt did nothing. – Kevin W. 2009/4/19 Igor S. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid): ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 9:36am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/3 "2009-04-20T09:36:23Z")
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 09:12:37PM -1000, Kevin W. wrote: > Is there a special way to start the windows version? Double-clicking > did nothing, and running from a prompt did nothing. cd c: unzip nginx-0.7.52.zip ren nginx-0.7.52 nginx cd nginx start nginx Control: nginx -s [stop | quit | reopen | reloadf] For problems look in c:\nginx\logs\error.log or in EventLog. ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 12:48pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/4 "2009-04-20T12:48:06Z")
Thanks for your hardwork. Do you have a plan to release the source of Windows version? * * * From：Igor S. Date：2009-04-20 14:40:53 To：nginx CC： Subject：nginx-0.7.52 Changes with nginx 0.7.52 20 Apr 2009 ``` *) Feature: the first native Windows binary release. *) Bugfix: in processing HEAD method while caching. *) Bugfix: in processing the "If-Modified-Since", "If-Range", etc. client request header lines while caching. *) Bugfix: now the "Set-Cookie" and "P3P" header lines are hidden in cacheable responses. *) Bugfix: if nginx was built with the ngx_http_perl_module and with ``` a perl which supports threads, then during a master process exit the message “panic: MUTEX\_LOCK” might be issued. ``` *) Bugfix: nginx could not be built --without-http-cache; the bug ``` had appeared in 0.7.48. ``` *) Bugfix: nginx could not be built on platforms different from ``` i386, amd64, sparc, and ppc; the bug had appeared in 0.7.42. – Igor S. [http://sysoev.ru/en/](http://sysoev.ru/en/) ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 1:27pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/5 "2009-04-20T13:27:55Z")
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 06:38:52PM +0800, Weibin Y. wrote: > Thanks for your hardwork. Do you have a plan to release the source of Windows version? Yes, after I will adopt ./configure for MSYS. Currently I ./configure nginx/Windows on FreeBSD using Wine in some places and I do want to support this procedure. ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 3:54pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/6 "2009-04-20T15:54:01Z")
> Changes with nginx 0.7.52 20 Apr 2009 > > \*) Feature: the first native Windows binary release. A really good news for me. I’m waiting for it for a long time. I think many people will try to use native Windows binary, although they did not say something about this like me. Robert Kwok ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 4:51pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/7 "2009-04-20T16:51:02Z")
2009/4/20 郭振立 [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid): > > Changes with nginx 0.7.52 20 Apr 2009 > > > > \*) Feature: the first native Windows binary release. > > A really good news for me. I’m waiting for it for a long time. > > I think many people will try to use native Windows binary, although they did > not say something about this like me. Indeed, does it make use of IOCP? is it supposed to be reasonably high performance? ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 1:41pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/8 "2009-04-20T13:41:23Z")
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 03:13:33PM +0400, Igor S. wrote: > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 06:38:52PM +0800, Weibin Y. wrote: > > > Thanks for your hardwork. Do you have a plan to release the source of Windows version? > > Yes, after I will adopt ./configure for MSYS. > Currently I ./configure nginx/Windows on FreeBSD using Wine in some places > and I do want to support this procedure. I do NOT want … ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 7:19pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/9 "2009-04-20T19:19:20Z")
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 04:42:12PM +0200, Joaquin Cuenca Abela wrote: > Indeed, does it make use of IOCP? is it supposed to be reasonably high > performance? No, currently it uses select(), therefore it would be slow and noscaleable. “We call it BETA as it’s better than nothing”. The next step will be IOCP with single thread, then with several threads: currently nginx is designed as single thread application, so it’s required to set mutexes and locks in various places. BTW, could someone run the simple small static file benchmark for nginx/Windows, nginx/Cygwin, Apache2 and IIS (from another host): ab -n 1000 -c 1 … ab -n 1000 -c 10 … ab -n 1000 -c 1 -k … ? ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2009, 7:41pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/10 "2009-04-20T19:41:44Z")
Thanks for the response. I am eager to try this out later. – Kevin W. ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 1:36am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/11 "2009-04-21T01:36:40Z")
Anyone know why the following wouldn’t prompt for an id and password? It just goes directly to my 401 (requires authorization) page. ` location ~ /(directory1/|directory2/|directory3/).* { fastcgi_pass 127.0.0.1:9000; fastcgi_index index.php; include fastcgi_params; auth_basic "Restricted"; auth_basic_user_file /etc/nginx/htpasswd; } ` ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 12:32am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/12 "2009-04-21T00:32:56Z")
Thanks for this release! I’ve been trying to get nginx going on Windows for a while now. With this latest build though, all I can get is “No input file specified”. I thought maybe I was specifying paths in a way it didn’t like but I’ve tried every variation on the Windows paths I can think of. This is my current conf for one of my sites. Can anyone tell me what’s wrong here? TIA. server { # listen 127.0.0.1:80; listen 80; server\_name jobsite.xpdesktop; access\_log “c:/cygwin/home/Chris/www/live/jobsite/logs/jobsite.access.log”; error\_log “c:/cygwin/home/Chris/www/live/jobsite/logs/jobsite.error.log” debug; root “c:/cygwin/home/Chris/www/live/jobsite/trunk/html/public”; index index.php index.html; location / { fastcgi\_pass 127.0.0.1:9000; fastcgi\_param SCRIPT\_FILENAME “c:/cygwin/home/Chris/www/live/jobsite/trunk/html/public/index.php”; fastcgi\_param QUERY\_STRING q=$request\_uri; include “c:/nginx/conf/fastcgi\_params”; } location ~ .php$ { fastcgi\_pass 127.0.0.1:9000; fastcgi\_index index.php; fastcgi\_param SCRIPT\_FILENAME “c:/cygwin/home/Chris/www/live/jobsite/trunk/html/public/$fastcgi\_script\_name”; fastcgi\_param QUERY\_STRING q=$request\_uri; include “c:/nginx/conf/fastcgi\_params”; } } ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 10:19am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/13 "2009-04-21T10:19:34Z")
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 03:51:57PM +0800, Weibin Y. wrote: > core.c > Requests per second: 703.30 [#/sec] (mean) > Test case2: > ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 1 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) > ab.exe -n 10000 -c 1 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) > > # Welcome to nginx! > 2. OS: Windows XP sp3, professional 3. CPU: Inlel pentium(R)4 3.0G 3.0G, memory: 1G. This is my PC, Dell 170L. Thank you, this is really surprise for me, I did not expect this. I needed this this simple benchmark to estimate Winsocket overhead. Could you also try the Cygwin 0.7.50 build: > **[Nginx for Windows - 32-bit and 64-bit - free, easy-to-use setup packages](https://kevinworthington.com/nginx-for-windows/)** > > Nginx web server for Windows: 32-bit and 64-bit builds, stable and mainline branches, are available for free download. Built using Cygwin. ? Could anyone test nginx against IIS/6 and /7 ? ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 10:03am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/14 "2009-04-21T10:03:43Z")
> BTW, could someone run the simple small static file benchmark for > nginx/Windows, nginx/Cygwin, Apache2 and IIS (from another host): > ab -n 1000 -c 1 … > ab -n 1000 -c 10 … > ab -n 1000 -c 1 -k … " This is my rough test results. It seems that the Windows version of Nginx is really great, even with the simple ‘select’ method. But it’s just a test with a small single static file. We need more real test cases between these web servers in Windows. * * * Test case1: Apache2.2.11 with all default configration httpd.exe -l Compiled in modules: core.c mod\_win32.c mpm\_winnt.c http\_core.c mod\_so.c ab.exe -n 10000 -c 1 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 497.57 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 68% ab.exe -n 10000 -c 10 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 703.30 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 100% ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 1 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 910.38 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 59% ## ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 10 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 1198.50 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 100% Test case2: IIS/5.1 with all default configration. ab.exe -n 10000 -c 1 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 534.22 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 65% ab.exe -n 10000 -c 10 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 829.02 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 100%, Failed requests: 49 ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 1 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 1207.55 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 60% ## ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 10 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 1600.00 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 100% Test case3: nginx/0.7.52 with all default configration. ab.exe -n 10000 -c 1 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 903.95 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 65% ab.exe -n 10000 -c 10 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 1012.66 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 90% ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 1 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 2424.24 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 68% ## ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 10 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 2529.64 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 67% My test platform: 1. All tested index page is: Welcome to nginx! # Welcome to nginx! 2. OS: Windows XP sp3, professional 3. CPU: Inlel pentium(R)4 3.0G 3.0G, memory: 1G. This is my PC, Dell 170L. ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 10:31am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/15 "2009-04-21T10:31:20Z")
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 03:51:57PM +0800, Weibin Y. wrote: > But it’s just a test with a small single static file. > We need more real test cases between these web > servers in Windows. Just note for everyone: “-c 10” (concurrency 10) is far from real world usage. The select() method used by nginx is poor scaleable for concurrency more than 100-200. ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 11:06am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/16 "2009-04-21T11:06:35Z")
> Thank you, this is really surprise for me, I did not expect this. > I needed this this simple benchmark to estimate Winsocket overhead. > Could you also try the Cygwin 0.7.50 build: > [Nginx for Windows - 32-bit and 64-bit - free, easy-to-use setup packages](http://www.kevinworthington.com/nginx-for-windows/) > ? > Could anyone test nginx against IIS/6 and /7 ? > Test case4: > nginx/0.7.50-win32-cygwin with all default configration. ab.exe -n 10000 -c 1 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 563.38 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 65% ab.exe -n 10000 -c 10 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 628.07 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 75% ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 1 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 1081.08 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 62% ## ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 10 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 1250.00 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 65% The CPU load is not a exact value, but a estimate value from the Windows Task Manager. > Just note for everyone: “-c 10” (concurrency 10) is far from real world > usage. The select() method used by nginx is poor scaleable for concurrency > more than 100-200. Yes, you are right. But it’s the select() problem, not Nginx. The IOCP method may be much better. * * * Weibin Y. 2009-04-21 ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 11:51am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/17 "2009-04-21T11:51:45Z")
> Just note for everyone: “-c 10” (concurrency 10) is far from real world > usage. The select() method used by nginx is poor scaleable for concurrency > more than 100-200. > It seems that the most suitable concurrency for my PC is 1-200. More tests in test case3 for Native Nginx in Windows: ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 1 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 2424.24 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 68% ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 10 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 2529.64 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 67% ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 30 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 2433.46 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 72% ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 50 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 2397.00 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 75% ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 75 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 2293.91 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 77% ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 100 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 2214.53 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 82% ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 200 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 2184.30 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 95% ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 300 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 1987.58 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 99% ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 500 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) Requests per second: 1549.64 [#/sec] (mean) CPU load: about 100% * * * Weibin Y. 2009-04-21 ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 12:02pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/18 "2009-04-21T12:02:55Z")
Hi! Please note that ab itself a huge bottleneck and it gives you zero information about nginx performance. As you can see you hit the 100% CPU -what comes from ab load-. I realized that during performance testing, all what I can tell you: use the httperf instead if you have a chance. (do not forget to modify the FD\_SETSIZE to higher value) Regards, Istvan 2009/4/21 Weibin Y. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 12:29pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/19 "2009-04-21T12:29:20Z")
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 05:43:48PM +0800, Weibin Y. wrote: > > Just note for everyone: “-c 10” (concurrency 10) is far from real world > > usage. The select() method used by nginx is poor scaleable for concurrency > > more than 100-200. > > It seems that the most suitable concurrency for my PC is 1-200. > > More tests in test case3 for Native Nginx in Windows: > > ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 1 [http://127.0.0.1/](http://127.0.0.1/) > Requests per second: 2424.24 [#/sec] (mean) > CPU load: about 68% Could you add open\_file\_cache max=1000 inactive=20s; open\_file\_cache\_valid 30s; open\_file\_cache\_min\_uses 2; open\_file\_cache\_errors on; and run just ab.exe -k -n 10000 -c 1 to see if CreateFile() adds noticeable overhead ? ---
**Author:** ![imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/3ab097/32.png) [@imixaly4](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/imixaly4)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2009, 12:20pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942/20 "2009-04-21T12:20:32Z")
István wrote: > Please note that ab itself a huge bottleneck and it gives you zero > information about nginx performance. As you can see you hit the 100% CPU > -what comes from ab load-. > I realized that during performance testing, all what I can tell you: use > the httperf instead if you have a chance. > (do not forget to modify the FD\_SETSIZE to higher value) Another replacement for ab is http\_load: [http://www.acme.com/software/http\_load/](http://www.acme.com/software/http_load/) [Next page](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/nginx-0-7-52/165942.md?page=2)