Nginx or apache, which one do you need ? CHOOSE WEBSERVER

[sadikyenpape]

TOPIC:
In tune with our Customer’s need and popular demand, Yenpape Hosting has always strived to offer its customers the most affordable solutions.

And this time, we offer the best-bundled prices for Hosting at the LOWEST prices.

NOW YOU CAN CHOOSE THE WEBSERVER WHAT YOU WANT - OPTIONABLE WEBSERVER in the HOSTING PLANET

Shared Hosting prices:

STARTER Only $2.04 /Month for a year
BUSINESS Only $3.51 /Month for a year
BUSINESS PRO $5.86 /Month for a year
UNLIMITED PRO $8.80 /Month for a year

https://www.yenpape.com/shared-hosting.php

Reseller Hosting Prices:

RESELLER 25GB Only $21.30 /Month
RESELLER 50GB Only $24.24 /Month
RESELLER 75GB Only $27.18 /Month
RESELLER 100GB Only $30.26 /Month
https://www.yenpape.com/reseller-hosting.php

CMS Hosting:

STARTER CMS Hosting Only $6.93 /Month for a year
BUSINESS CMS Hosting Only $9.91 /Month for a year
BUSINESS PRO CMS Hosting Only $14.86 /Month for a year
http://www.yenpape.com/cms-hosting.php

WordPress Hosting:

STARTER WordPress Only $6.93 /Month for a year
BUSINESS WordPress Only $9.91 /Month for a year
BUSINESS PRO WordPress $14.86 /Month for a year
https://www.yenpape.com/wordpress-hosting.php

eCommerce Hosting:

STARTER Ecommerce - COMMERCE Hosting Only $88.07 /Month for a year
BUSINESS commerceE - COMMERCE Hosting Only $98.26 /Month for a year
BUSINESS PRO Ecommerce - COMMERCE Hosting Only $148.07 /Month for a year
http://www.yenpape.com/e-commerce-hosting.php

Yenpape Features :

Optional Webserver, you can choose what web server you want
FREE BACKUP to 1GB
Easy WordPress Launch
1-Click WordPress + 400+ Script Installation
Free Template & Installation From Our Support
Free Transfer, No Hassle with Yenpape - The Hosting experts

At www.yenpape.com We have an excellent Support Team available online 24 x 7 which brings a satisfied smile on our customer's faces.

So still what are looking for , for a FASTEST Shared Hosting or a Fastest Webserver

Why Wait visit now www.yenpape.com !

Yenpape Hosting - The Hosting Experts
- sales@yenpape.com
- www.yenpape.com

[mani ge3e]

Apache and Nginx are the two most common open source web servers in the world. Together, they are responsible for serving over 50% of traffic on the internet. Both solutions are capable of handling diverse workloads and working with other software to provide a complete web stack.

While Apache and Nginx share many qualities, they should not be thought of as entirely interchangeable. Each excels in its own way and it is important to understand the situations where you may need to reevaluate your web server of choice. This article will be devoted to a discussion of how each server stacks up in various areas.
General Overview

Before we dive into the differences between Apache and Nginx, let's take a quick look at the background of these two projects and their general characteristics.
Apache

The Apache HTTP Server was created by Robert McCool in 1995 and has been developed under the direction of the Apache Software Foundation since 1999. Since the HTTP web server is the foundation's original project and is by far their most popular piece of software, it is often referred to simply as "Apache".

The Apache web server has been the most popular server on the internet since 1996. Because of this popularity, Apache benefits from great documentation and integrated support from other software projects.

Apache is often chosen by administrators for its flexibility, power, and widespread support. It is extensible through a dynamically loadable module system and can process a large number of interpreted languages without connecting out to separate software.
Nginx

In 2002, Igor Sysoev began work on Nginx as an answer to the C10K problem, which was a challenge for web servers to begin handling ten thousand concurrent connections as a requirement for the modern web. The initial public release was made in 2004, meeting this goal by relying on an asynchronous, events-driven architecture.

Nginx has grown in popularity since its release due to its light-weight resource utilization and its ability to scale easily on minimal hardware. Nginx excels at serving static content quickly and is designed to pass dynamic requests off to other software that is better suited for those purposes.

Nginx is often selected by administrators for its resource efficiency and responsiveness under load. Advocates welcome Nginx's focus on core web server and proxy features.
Connection Handling Architecture

One big difference between Apache and Nginx is the actual way that they handle connections and traffic. This provides perhaps the most significant difference in the way that they respond to different traffic conditions.
Apache

Apache provides a variety of multi-processing modules (Apache calls these MPMs) that dictate how client requests are handled. Basically, this allows administrators to swap out its connection handling architecture easily. These are:

mpm_prefork: This processing module spawns processes with a single thread each to handle request. Each child can handle a single connection at a time. As long as the number of requests is fewer than the number of processes, this MPM is very fast. However, performance degrades quickly after the requests surpass the number of processes, so this is not a good choice in many scenarios. Each process has a significant impact on RAM consumption, so this MPM is difficult to scale effectively. This may still be a good choice though if used in conjunction with other components that are not built with threads in mind. For instance, PHP is not thread-safe, so this MPM is recommended as the only safe way of working with mod_php, the Apache module for processing these files.
mpm_worker: This module spawns processes that can each manage multiple threads. Each of these threads can handle a single connection. Threads are much more efficient than processes, which means that this MPM scales better than the prefork MPM. Since there are more threads than processes, this also means that new connections can immediately take a free thread instead of having to wait for a free process.
mpm_event: This module is similar to the worker module in most situations, but is optimized to handle keep-alive connections. When using the worker MPM, a connection will hold a thread regardless of whether a request is actively being made for as long as the connection is kept alive. The event MPM handles keep alive connections by setting aside dedicated threads for handling keep alive connections and passing active requests off to other threads. This keeps the module from getting bogged down by keep-alive requests, allowing for faster execution. This was marked stable with the release of Apache 2.4.

As you can see, Apache provides a flexible architecture for choosing different connection and request handling algorithms. The choices provided are mainly a function of the server's evolution and the increasing need for concurrency as the internet landscape has changed.
Nginx

Nginx came onto the scene after Apache, with more awareness of the concurrency problems that would face sites at scale. Leveraging this knowledge, Nginx was designed from the ground up to use an asynchronous, non-blocking, event-driven connection handling algorithm.

Nginx spawns worker processes, each of which can handle thousands of connections. The worker processes accomplish this by implementing a fast looping mechanism that continuously checks for and processes events. Decoupling actual work from connections allows each worker to concern itself with a connection only when a new event has been triggered.

Each of the connections handled by the worker are placed within the event loop where they exist with other connections. Within the loop, events are processed asynchronously, allowing work to be handled in a non-blocking manner. When the connection closes, it is removed from the loop.

This style of connection processing allows Nginx to scale incredibly far with limited resources. Since the server is single-threaded and processes are not spawned to handle each new connection, the memory and CPU usage tends to stay relatively consistent, even at times of heavy load.
Static vs Dynamic Content

In terms of real world use-cases, one of the most common comparisons between Apache and Nginx is the way in which each server handles requests for static and dynamic content.
Apache

Apache servers can handle static content using its conventional file-based methods. The performance of these operations is mainly a function of the MPM methods described above.

Apache can also process dynamic content by embedding a processor of the language in question into each of its worker instances. This allows it to execute dynamic content within the web server itself without having to rely on external components. These dynamic processors can be enabled through the use of dynamically loadable modules.

Apache's ability to handle dynamic content internally means that configuration of dynamic processing tends to be simpler. Communication does not need to be coordinated with an additional piece of software and modules can easily be swapped out if the content requirements change.
Nginx

Nginx does not have any ability to process dynamic content natively. To handle PHP and other requests for dynamic content, Nginx must pass to an external processor for execution and wait for the rendered content to be sent back. The results can then be relayed to the client.

For administrators, this means that communication must be configured between Nginx and the processor over one of the protocols Nginx knows how to speak (http, FastCGI, SCGI, uWSGI, memcache). This can complicate things slightly, especially when trying to anticipate the number of connections to allow, as an additional connection will be used for each call to the processor.

However, this method has some advantages as well. Since the dynamic interpreter is not embedded in the worker process, its overhead will only be present for dynamic content. Static content can be served in a straight-forward manner and the interpreter will only be contacted when needed. Apache can also function in this manner, but doing so removes the benefits in the previous section.
Distributed vs Centralized Configuration

For administrators, one of the most readily apparent differences between these two pieces of software is whether directory-level configuration is permitted within the content directories.
Apache

Apache includes an option to allow additional configuration on a per-directory basis by inspecting and interpreting directives in hidden files within the content directories themselves. These files are known as .htaccess files.

Since these files reside within the content directories themselves, when handling a request, Apache checks each component of the path to the requested file for an .htaccess file and applies the directives found within. This effectively allows decentralized configuration of the web server, which is often used for implementing URL rewrites, access restrictions, authorization and authentication, even caching policies.

While the above examples can all be configured in the main Apache configuration file, .htaccess files have some important advantages. First, since these are interpreted each time they are found along a request path, they are implemented immediately without reloading the server. Second, it makes it possible to allow non-privileged users to control certain aspects of their own web content without giving them control over the entire configuration file.

This provides an easy way for certain web software, like content management systems, to configure their environment without providing access to the central configuration file. This is also used by shared hosting providers to retain control of the main configuration while giving clients control over their specific directories.