httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Bannister <>
Subject Re: commercial support
Date Thu, 20 Nov 2014 22:30:38 GMT
On 20 Nov 2014, at 22:00, Jim Jagielski <> wrote:
> Honestly though, how much of the uptake in nginx do people think is actually due to nginx
being "better" or the "best" choice, and how much do you think is cue simply because it's
*seen* as better or that we are seen as old and tired?
> This is our 20year anniversary... It would be cool to use that to remind people! :)

Here are some plausible explanations, off the top of my head but with editing.

I reckon that at least some of the perception is down to Apache httpd being used in “enterprise”
systems that are a long way back from the bleeding edge. If your mission-critical system is
running a webserver release that's older than nginx itself then it's likely that nginx will
look and work better.

Another challenge is compatibility. As the default webserver on lots of distributions, httpd
has a lot of existing users who don't want to see it break in an upgrade. For that reason,
an upgrade typically won't convert an installation from prefork to another MPM. Install nginx…
and it performs very differently; it's also complicated enough to merit a HOWTO. There won't
be as many HOWTO guides about a one-line change to select a different MPM.

There are now plenty of guides to building nginx from source. To be honest, this is a bit
more straightforward than the equivalent task for httpd 2.4.x because operating systems that
include httpd 2.2 may well have too-old APR and APR-Util  as well. AIUI, nginx has fewer dependencies.

Commercial support sounds nice. I think firms who'd pay for it would really like to get a
commercially-supported web server bundled with their “enterprise” operating system. In
that sense, Oracle and Red Hat are already offering commercial support for httpd.

Tim Bannister –
View raw message