# Tengine-1.2.3

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/tengine-1-2-3/217357>\
**Category:** NGINX\
**Created:** [February 28, 2012, 5:13pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/tengine-1-2-3/217357 "2012-02-28T17:13:02Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![luislavena](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/0ea827/32.png) [@luislavena](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/luislavena)\
**Post date:** [February 28, 2012, 5:13pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/tengine-1-2-3/217357/1 "2012-02-28T17:13:02Z")

</div>

Hi guys,

We’re glad to announce that Tengine-1.2.3 has been released. You can  
download it here:  
[http://tengine.taobao.org/download/tengine-1.2.3.tar.gz](http://tengine.taobao.org/download/tengine-1.2.3.tar.gz)

Starting from this release, Tengine is based on Nginx-1.0.12. Other  
changes  
include:

- Feature: adds the ‘request\_time\_cache’ directive, to get more precise  
$request\_time/$request\_time\_msec/$request\_time\_usec.
- Feature: adds the ‘slice’ module to get a part of a static file.
- Change: deletes unused browser detection.
- Bugfix: fixes a bug in upstream when reading header.
- Bugfix: fixes a bug in ‘expires\_by\_types’.

OT:  
Apache 2.4 is getting very hot these days. Some Apache guy even claimed  
it’s faster than Nginx. So I ran a simple benchmark. It turned out Nginx  
was still the winner. More detailed information:  
[http://blog.zhuzhaoyuan.com/2012/02/apache-24-faster-than-nginx/](http://blog.zhuzhaoyuan.com/2012/02/apache-24-faster-than-nginx/)

Regards,

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Joshua\_Z](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/ccd318/32.png) [@Joshua\_Z](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Joshua_Z)\
**Post date:** [February 28, 2012, 10:39pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/tengine-1-2-3/217357/2 "2012-02-28T22:39:25Z")

</div>

> OT:  
> Apache 2.4 is getting very hot these days. Some Apache guy even claimed it’s  
> faster than Nginx. So I ran a simple benchmark. It turned out Nginx was  
> still the winner. More detailed information:  
> [http://blog.zhuzhaoyuan.com/2012/02/apache-24-faster-than-nginx/](http://blog.zhuzhaoyuan.com/2012/02/apache-24-faster-than-nginx/)

Does the benchmark change if you use the 1.1.x series? Also I was  
looking at setting up a Ramdisk (serving static files) does using a  
Ramdisk increase throughput?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Joshua\_Z](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/ccd318/32.png) [@Joshua\_Z](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Joshua_Z)\
**Post date:** [February 28, 2012, 10:56pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/tengine-1-2-3/217357/3 "2012-02-28T22:56:44Z")

</div>

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Joshua Z. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid)  
wrote:

> Apache 2.4 is getting very hot these days. Some Apache guy even claimed it’s  
> faster than Nginx.

Most of the benchmarks I’ve seen are suspect. Even the ones that claim  
nginx is faster. In our use case, it’s not even close with nginx vs  
2.2. I’ll retest with 2.4, obviously.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Joshua\_Z](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/ccd318/32.png) [@Joshua\_Z](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Joshua_Z)\
**Post date:** [March 1, 2012, 5:42am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/tengine-1-2-3/217357/4 "2012-03-01T05:42:19Z")

</div>

Hi,

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 5:38 AM, Ryan B. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote:

> 

I believe there is no performance difference between nginx-1.0.x and  
nginx-1.1.x when serving static files. Yet I think it worth a try.  
Theoretically, using Ramdisk will be faster. But stressing the same file  
should have the same effect, since most will be in the OS’ vm cache.

Regards,