LiteSpeed, anyone

L

layer0

Verified User
Joined
Aug 3, 2006
Messages
82
voxxitdesigns said:
Or, we could just ask the DirectAdmin staff to build the functionality into the new custombuild script. I really have to give my vote to LightTPD. I've seen some really great things. This article is another example of why this should be a change worth considering:

http://www.vmunix.com/mark/blog/archives/2006/01/02/fastcgi-scgi-and-apache-background-and-future

Apache + modules = poor reliablity. The memory consumption of httpd is just bad. I had a client with a dedicated server who was running millions of page views a day. His (cluster) of about 3 servers were all running out of memory trying to process mod_PHP + Apache requests. So, I moved him to *one* server, with LightTPD and a CGI version of PHP, and his server had like 80% of its memory available, with faster responses.

It's the wave of the future, guys. Surf it! ;)
Click to expand...

Forget Apache, and even Lighttpd (since honestly, that is never going to be compatible with DirectAdmin, and it doesn't even support .htaccess or RewriteRules in the same fashion as Apache).

www.litespeedtech.com is FULLY compatible with DirectAdmin. We run it across our fleet. We love it.
 
layer0 said:
Forget Apache, and even Lighttpd (since honestly, that is never going to be compatible with DirectAdmin, and it doesn't even support .htaccess or RewriteRules in the same fashion as Apache).

www.litespeedtech.com is FULLY compatible with DirectAdmin. We run it across our fleet. We love it.
Click to expand...
Even though that product is commercial? I just spent $299 for a license for DirectAdmin for each server. I don't know too many people who will want to spend more than that, especially if you have companies like us with multiple servers.
 
voxxitdesigns said:
Even though that product is commercial? I just spent $299 for a license for DirectAdmin for each server. I don't know too many people who will want to spend more than that, especially if you have companies like us with multiple servers.
Click to expand...

Doesn't bother me. We see a 100%+ performance increase. Spend less on hardware. :)

edit: Also, if you're running any VPSes, it wouldn't hurt to use the standard edition. :)
 
voxxitdesigns said:
Even though that product is commercial? I just spent $299 for a license for DirectAdmin for each server. I don't know too many people who will want to spend more than that, especially if you have companies like us with multiple servers.
Click to expand...
Also, I would like to point out the benchmarks here:

http://www.litespeedtech.com/library/benchmarks/benchmark_r3/

The "free Standard edition" doesn't really do much in the way of speed boost when you compare it to Apache or even LighTPD. I don't really know what type of proprietary technology they use to get the results of the Enterprise editions, but that's besides the point. No one is going to pay more for a server that costs $499 on top of a DA license.

What I think the users of DA really want is something that is less memory intensive, and more structured and expandable. Like I said, maybe they can offer two different build scripts with DA with different types of web server software and config/log files? I don't think it'd be hard to do.
 
voxxitdesigns said:
Also, I would like to point out the benchmarks here:

http://www.litespeedtech.com/library/benchmarks/benchmark_r3/

The "free Standard edition" doesn't really do much in the way of speed boost when you compare it to Apache or even LighTPD. I don't really know what type of proprietary technology they use to get the results of the Enterprise editions, but that's besides the point. No one is going to pay more for a server that costs $499 on top of a DA license.

What I think the users of DA really want is something that is less memory intensive, and more structured and expandable. Like I said, maybe they can offer two different build scripts with DA with different types of web server software and config/log files? I don't think it'd be hard to do.
Click to expand...

1. The benchmarks on the site are for LiteSpeed 2.x, and do not reflect the performance of LiteSpeed 3.x.

2. LiteSpeed is able to do FastCGI through the LSAPI which is more efficient than Lighttpd + FastCGI (~ 30% better performance).

3. Because LiteSpeed is a commercial product, you get excellent support. Any bugs or issues are fixed immediately. With Lighttpd? Not a chance. There have been times when Jan - lighttpd developer (I think that's her name?) has simply disappeared for a bit....

Our hosting operation is clearly very different from yours, but for our environment, LiteSpeed has proved to be excellent.

$499 is a small investment for the performance improvement you get as a result. Could you imagine doubling your server's capacity? That's like ordering a server with double the specs. That would cost a lot more than $499 per year.

Oh, and how about I add that LiteSpeed has it's own administrative console, where you can view real time statistics of the requests per second each site receives - this can help IMMENSELY in figuring out which site is causing the load to rise on the server, etc. LiteSpeed is simply superior, and it is well worth the price tag.

Thank you,
 
That is besides the point. First of all, LiteSpeed is not open-source, therefore DA could not include it with their software. That defeats the point of putting LiteSpeed on the table in the first place. Sure, if an individual or company wanted to place it on their servers after they purchase DA, all the more power to them.

Second, I'd like to see the benchmarks for both 3.0 and your argument that LSAPI has a "30%" increase in performance over LightTPD + FastCGI.

Third, I don't know how long its been since you've been over to LightTPD's website, but their community and support is phenomenal. Further, LightTPD is number 5 in NetCraft's most used web server list:

http://survey.netcraft.com/Reports/0705/

LiteSpeed actually lost some servers from Dec '06, which tells me either you're having some good luck with their software, or you're holding out on us about some bugs ;)

Not to mention, YouTube and Wikimedia both use LightTPD, among other top web sites out there.
 
DirectAdmin doesn't need to do anything from their side to include LiteSpeed.

But, if you want more performance than Apache LiteSpeed is certainly the way. There's a page on LiteSpeed's wiki discussing the method of "integrating" it with DirectAdmin.

Sure, I'll do some benchmarks.

We have fleets of servers running LiteSpeed, and if it wasn't a great web server, I wouldn't be wasting my time here talking about.

Netcraft doesn't feature every server, and I believe a later feature of LiteSpeed allows you to hide what server you are running in the first place (completely remove the headers), which COULD account for that. But of course, if you prefer to be presumptuous and assume that there are bugs, more to power to you, we only have so much experience hosting high traffic sites.

Youtube uses Apache for their main site, and Lighttpd for serving static files.

www.wordpress.com and www.wordpress.org use LiteSpeed. We host many Word Press blogs, and they literally fly. Oh, and a blog that's a sub-section of www.hollywood.com also runs on LiteSpeed. Let's not forget www.fanfiction.net. :)

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?q=&url=wordpress.com

You have no experience with LiteSpeed, yet you are being presumptuous in stating there are "bugs". I'd suggest you take a free 30 day trial of LiteSpeed, and see for yourself.
 
p.s. unsubscribed from this thread.

Time to deploy some more servers with LiteSpeed. :) Have a good day,
 
OK, when you have some benchmarks for me, I'd be glad to take a look.

No hard feelings, by the way. I'm glad you brought LiteSpeed to the table. I would encourage you to take a look at their TOS or licensing policies on including the software with other software (like DA, for example) because sometimes companies don't like that, or want to keep track of who downloads for sales purposes, etc.

http://news.netcraft.com/archives/web_server_survey.html

If you notice the second graph on that page, Apache usage is declining. I think we can both agree on that, right? Therefore, the main argument here is offering alternatives for DA customers to use different web servers with the DA control panel software. Locking a customer into Apache isn't really a good option these days with different needs of different customers.

I'd like to hear what DA Support has to say about offering different versions of DA for different web servers.
 
No hard feelings, by the way. I'm glad you brought LiteSpeed to the table. I would encourage you to take a look at their TOS or licensing policies on including the software with other software (like DA, for example) because sometimes companies don't like that, or want to keep track of who downloads for sales purposes, etc.

http://news.netcraft.com/archives/we...er_survey.html
Click to expand...
?? Are you referring to LiteSpeed's TOS? My company has formed a partnership with LiteSpeed, I can assure that they don't disapprove of our implementation. Heck, if you simply look at www.litespeedtech.com they advertise that it is compatible with DirectAdmin....perhaps you really didn't take a close look ?
 
LiteSpeed Web Server Standard Edition is free for both private and commercial use.
Click to expand...

OK, point taken. However, I still stand by my dealings with LighTPD. Also, is the extra control panel with LiteSpeed necessary (e.g., can things be controlled by DA?)

This really isn't a discussion about LiteSpeed v. LighTPD, it is a matter of why Apache is an old, decrepit memory hog. :)
 
voxxitdesigns said:
OK, point taken. However, I still stand by my dealings with LighTPD. Also, is the extra control panel with LiteSpeed necessary (e.g., can things be controlled by DA?)

This really isn't a discussion about LiteSpeed v. LighTPD, it is a matter of why Apache is an old, decrepit memory hog. :)
Click to expand...

It's not a control panel, its a console. Read about it. Their site explains everything. But, the console doesn't need to be used to managed vhosts, it is all through DA. The integration works 100%, we have zero issues.
 
Therefore, we need some kind of solution for the LightTPD (or other, e.g., LiteSpeed) web servers.
Click to expand...
DA doesn't have to do anything. We've made our own build script that simply runs after DA installs. It installs our LiteSpeed configuration, compiles PHP, grabs the appropriate eAccelerator libs, etc.
 
layer0 said:
DA doesn't have to do anything. We've made our own build script that simply runs after DA installs. It installs our LiteSpeed configuration, compiles PHP, grabs the appropriate eAccelerator libs, etc.
Click to expand...

You've made that quite clear. Congratulations. However, it was posted earlier in this thread that DA heavily relies on specific configuration files with Apache, and therefore it would be rather difficult to make any other web server the default (and only) web server on the machine.
 
Actually, in the case of LiteSpeed, that's not the case. I've done a couple of test servers to see what kind of performance/capacity increase it has over Apache, and it really is quite interesting.

The httpd config that DirectAdmin uses is 100% compatible with LiteSpeed. You edit a site in DA, that updates the necessary config, LiteSpeed automatically reloads the config after the change. It uses the Apache config exactly as DA creates it. No config changes necessary.

There are two or three small changes necessary in webmail config, but that's basically it. It just works. Here's the link to the step-by-step:
http://www.litespeedtech.com/support/wiki/doku.php?id=litespeed_wiki:apache:da
 
We've only been testing for a short time on a server with just a few sites on it, but I'd say yes at this point. In the region of twice as fast (generally, averaged across different types of pages, PHP, lots of images, etc) for around half the resources (load averages are much lower with a high number of clients connecting). YMMV.
 
Thanks zaphod and layer0

btw, does LiteSpeed offer any discounts or internal price? The price listed on their website is a bit expensive.
 
just switched! its awesome!
Gotta stop apache from directadmin though or it will keep restatring it :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top