Story

Use of NGINX Increases

Preview

Not to minimize NGINX ... (Score: 3, Interesting)

by fnj@pipedot.org on 2014-04-27 12:30 (#16P)

... but iut's "just" a forked Apache. Apache's model of thread/process-per-connection is simple and reliable, but performance slides toward terrible as the number of concurrent connections becomes vbery large.

Re: Not to minimize NGINX ... (Score: 2, Interesting)

by computermachine@pipedot.org on 2014-04-27 16:22 (#16W)

No, you're wrong, Nginx definitely does not spawn a thread/process for each connection.

Re: Not to minimize NGINX ... (Score: 0)

by Anonymous Coward on 2014-04-27 18:56 (#16X)

he said:
*Apache's* model of thread/process-per-connection is simple and reliable ...

Re: Not to minimize NGINX ... (Score: 2, Interesting)

by songofthepogo@pipedot.org on 2014-04-27 22:38 (#16Y)

I know that I, apparently erroneously, inferred from his statement just prior ("a forked Apache") to mean NGINX is also multi-threaded, though he did put "just" in quotes, so perhaps I should've read something into that.

Coincidentally, I was just skimming an article on Ars about Heartbleed when I ran across the following: "Note: all my experiments and the CloudFlare challenge are targeting Nginx which is single-threaded. It is possible that for a multi-threaded wWb server, more leakage can be observed."

Moderation

Time Reason Points Voter
2014-04-28 09:47 Interesting +1 computermachine@pipedot.org

Junk Status

Not marked as junk