Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nginx reaches 33.3% web server market share while Apache falls below 50%

w3techs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 190 posts

Re: Nginx reaches 33.3% web server market share while Apache falls below 50%

#131

Post by cstrahan »

boznz wrote: post #121

Can also be re-written as "Apache Still the dominant web platform for the internet despite the upstarts.." I Don't consciously know either server, I just like the way sites can spin facts differently.

Apache was originally released in 1995, and has since maintained an enormous user base. It was the de facto standard for at least decade -- if you learned web dev between 1995-2005 you almost certainly found that (at least) 9 out of 10 books/articles/etc suggested that you use Apache.

That is, until a while after Nginx was released in 2004 and started to pick up adoption. Most articles I've seen over the past 4 years or so suggest using Nginx, and most web dev newbies I've met in the past year or two only know of Nginx.

So no, this is not about spin, this mostly about "hey, if you're still using Apache, the rate at which Nginx is being adopted just might warrant further consideration of switching, or at least adopting Nginx for further projects."

Re: Nginx reaches 33.3% web server market share while Apache falls below 50%

#132

Post by cdubzzz »

pthreads wrote: post #128
boznz wrote: post #121

Can also be re-written as "Apache Still the dominant web platform for the internet despite the upstarts.." I Don't consciously know either server, I just like the way sites can spin facts differently.

>Can also be re-written as "Apache Still the dominant web platform for the internet despite the upstarts.." No, it can't. That just misses the entire point of the article. The key take away from it is how much Nginx has grown in the last few years by taking share away from Apache especially those deployments that needed support of modern protocols (from the article: 76.8% of all sites supporting HTTP/2 use Nginx, whi…

I assume boznz meant an entire (different) article could be written with that headline. One can certainly call this or the theoretical opposite article spin.

Re: Nginx reaches 33.3% web server market share while Apache falls below 50%

#133

Post by rgacote »

hdhzy wrote: post #109
rgacote wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nginx is turning into much more than just a load balancer. Projects such as OpenResty (a full CMS built into nginx) and Kong (an API management service), are built right into nginx using Lua. We've done some minor nginx Lua extensions and are looking to offload activities such as JSON validation into the front-end nginx. http://openresty.org/ https://getkong.org

By JSON validation do you mean just checking if it's well formed or rather something like JSON Schema validation? The latter seems tricky. It's validation inside the application a bottleneck?

Yes, json validation against schema. Bigger picture, in future we're looking to do some upstream proxy redirects based on payload. Figured the first step is short-circuiting anyone not sending us valid json. Plus, back ends are written in a variety of languages -- not all of whom do json schema validation nicely.

Re: Nginx reaches 33.3% web server market share while Apache falls below 50%

#134

Post by xorcist »

astrange wrote: post #120
shanemhansen wrote: post #66

Apache has historically been a giant swiss army knife that will do just about everything you could want, from redirect databases to cgi to php interpreters to crazy auth setups. It did all that while still being a reasonably good workhorse for static file serving (when properly turned and using the right worker model, event rather than threaded or process). Nginx seems to have a different model. It does support a num…

> It did all that while still being a reasonably good workhorse for static file serving (when properly turned and using the right worker model, event rather than threaded or process). event doesn't support HTTPS, or rather, it stops being event-based when you turn on HTTPS. So Apache can never be performant unless you have an SSL terminating proxy. Its only advantage is that the config script is slightly easier to te…

> event doesn't support HTTPS, or rather, it stops being event-based when you turn on HTTPS

Have you got any reference to this? I think I should have noticed, having run Apache with fairly bursty traffic.

The only reference in the documentation was a four year old one, which said it was problematic six years prior to that...

I find the Event MPM to be very stable under pressure and unless you have some really specific need it's the only sane way to run Apache. It should have been the default ages ago (in the limited sense Apache even has defaults).

Re: Nginx reaches 33.3% web server market share while Apache falls below 50%

#135

Post by Sir_Substance »

jimjag wrote: post #31

How much of nginx's growth is, do you think, due to it being "better" than Apache httpd (which it isn't, BTW. Apache 2.4 is easily as fast and scalable as nginx), compared to either (1) The aggressive sales and marketing of NGINX the company or (2) nginx fronting Apache httpd and thus "hiding" the growth of Apache httpd usage. But there are lots of Apache httpd haters, for some reason, and so they LOVE promoting the…

>How much of nginx's growth is, do you think, due to it being "better" than Apache httpd

If I were to take a guess based on my own experience, I'd say hobbyists and teenage experimenters are increasingly using nginx over apache because nginx configs are considerably easier to understand.

Over time, that is slowly translating to increased use in production environments as these people move into the workforce and apply their skills to production grade services.

Re: Nginx reaches 33.3% web server market share while Apache falls below 50%

#136

Post by merpnderp »

CalRobert wrote: post #57
jimjag wrote: post #31

How much of nginx's growth is, do you think, due to it being "better" than Apache httpd (which it isn't, BTW. Apache 2.4 is easily as fast and scalable as nginx), compared to either (1) The aggressive sales and marketing of NGINX the company or (2) nginx fronting Apache httpd and thus "hiding" the growth of Apache httpd usage. But there are lots of Apache httpd haters, for some reason, and so they LOVE promoting the…

I started needing to configure web stuff about 6 or 7 years ago. At the time, I could use nginx or Apache. I spent a bit of time (maybe 20 minutes) with Apache since I'd heard of it, thought "Ugh this is a pain and I just want to move on to the fun parts of this project and not banal config details", and then tried nginx. It was much easier, and I've never bothered to learn Apache. To be honest I've kind of assumed i…

This was exactly my experience. I learned Apache and knew how to configure it. But once I tried Nginx I never wanted to fuss with an Apache config again.

Re: Nginx reaches 33.3% web server market share while Apache falls below 50%

#137

Post by astrange »

xorcist wrote: post #134
astrange wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It did all that while still being a reasonably good workhorse for static file serving (when properly turned and using the right worker model, event rather than threaded or process). event doesn't support HTTPS, or rather, it stops being event-based when you turn on HTTPS. So Apache can never be performant unless you have an SSL terminating proxy. Its only advantage is that the config script is slightly easier to te…

> event doesn't support HTTPS, or rather, it stops being event-based when you turn on HTTPS Have you got any reference to this? I think I should have noticed, having run Apache with fairly bursty traffic. The only reference in the documentation was a four year old one, which said it was problematic six years prior to that... I find the Event MPM to be very stable under pressure and unless you have some really specifi…

Hmm, it seems like it works now in 2.4. That's a reason to keep Apache but I still can't see a reason to run anything new on it.

Re: Nginx reaches 33.3% web server market share while Apache falls below 50%

#138

Post by smsm42 »

ag_47 wrote: post #113
smsm42 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are degrees of complexity, there's a kind of spectrum even. If you want a full-blown business logic that requires language like PHP or Go, it's insane to try and make Apache do it. If you need a set of simple rules that are within what Apache (including there all the module ecosystem) can and is designed to do, it would be a big mistake, costing a lot of scalability, to deploy high-level language instead. Right…

> if you want your webserver to do something complex, you'd go for Apache > a set of simple rules that are within what Apache (including there all the module ecosystem) can and is designed to do

Again, there are degrees of complexity. Very simple - nginx, kinda more complex - Apache, somewhat complex but still doable without using Turning-complete language - third-party Apache modules, needs Turing-complete language or you're wasting your time - Python/PHP/Perl/pick your poison.

Re: Nginx reaches 33.3% web server market share while Apache falls below 50%

#139

Post by mixedCase »

tannhaeuser wrote: post #59
mixedCase wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As opposed to closing tags? All decent text editors have matching parens highlighting. SXML is much easier to parse and it's more concise.

HTML itself allows SGML-style tag omission since HTML was originally an application of SGML. A simple example can be found at [1], and can also be seen in action in my talk slides linked from [2]. [1] http://sgmljs.net/docs/html5.html#tag-omission-on-document-l... [2] http://sgmljs.net/blog/blog1701.html

We're talking XML rather than HTML (and omitting certain closing tags isn't compliant HTML5 anyway).

In XML there's also the concept of using self-closing tags only for "empty tags". Meaning, isn't "correct" and 123 should be used instead; while s-expressions simplify this.

Post reply on HN