atom feed21 messages in ru.sysoev.nginxRe: Sensible Performance/Growth Strat...
FromSent OnAttachments
Raina GustafsonAug 4, 2010 10:32 am 
Hone WatsonAug 4, 2010 4:52 pm 
Raina GustafsonAug 5, 2010 8:08 am 
Igor SysoevAug 5, 2010 8:39 am 
Alex SergeyevAug 5, 2010 9:24 am 
Igor SysoevAug 5, 2010 9:36 am 
rai...@ultra-secure.deAug 5, 2010 9:48 am 
Igor SysoevAug 5, 2010 9:54 am 
Raina GustafsonAug 5, 2010 10:40 am 
Rainer DuffnerAug 5, 2010 11:44 am 
Igor SysoevAug 5, 2010 11:51 am 
Michael ShadleAug 5, 2010 11:55 am 
Rainer DuffnerAug 5, 2010 12:06 pm 
Hone WatsonAug 5, 2010 6:15 pm 
Dennis J.Aug 5, 2010 7:33 pm 
Hone WatsonAug 5, 2010 8:45 pm 
khat...@serverorigin.comAug 5, 2010 10:31 pm 
Ryan MalayterAug 6, 2010 4:15 am 
Guillaume FilionAug 16, 2010 6:00 am 
Raina GustafsonAug 16, 2010 9:42 am 
Michael ShadleAug 16, 2010 11:53 am 
Subject:Re: Sensible Performance/Growth Strategies?
From:Igor Sysoev (ig@sysoev.ru)
Date:Aug 5, 2010 9:54:35 am
List:ru.sysoev.nginx

On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 06:49:21PM +0200, rai@ultra-secure.de wrote:

On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 12:24:23PM -0400, Alex Sergeyev wrote:

varnish relies on OS internals too: it mmap()s a huge file that may be larger tens times physical memory and perfomance relies on how OS flushes modified pages to a disk and how then OS reads them back to memory.

I'm not sure about internals of each project and how they work under Linux vs FreeBSD servers. This could be a decision reason too.

Both Varnish and nginx are developed on FreeBSD.

Recently, we did a test with serving just static files (from a FreeBSD8.1 VM), a very small data-set. nginx0.7 was 1.8 times faster than varnish (both mostly untuned). So, I'd say that OOTB, just serving static files, nginx wins. Though, I still think that varnish has a place and there are probably certain situations where it can beat and will nginx.

What have you set behind Varnish ?