30 ms·

WordPress famously used LiteSpeed (and still does) and the only benefit I know of from the time is that LS has a much better PHP SAPI than fcgi with php-fpm. Bu

WordPress famously used LiteSpeed (and still does) and the only benefit I know of from the time is that LS has a much better PHP SAPI than fcgi with php-fpm. But now we have nginx unit with native php support (no fcgi), which halves the php-fpm base latency and can be run standalone or behind nginx (via an http proxy over tcp or preferably a Unix socket) so the advantages of an LS (or OLS) configuration are probably non-existent.

pbowyer 3y ago
"halves the php-fpm base latency" Have you a source for that? I've been having this discussion (that php-fpm is slower than needed) but I haven't found any hard data.
- ComputerGuru 3y ago
  There are benchmarks readily available if you search “nginx unit php benchmark” (some that show an order of magnitude reduction in latency) without the quotes, but I hesitate to link to any of them as configuring nginx is highly complicated and has so many knobs, particularly with backend upstreams that can be configured in a myriad of ways. My advice would be to try and see.
rmccue 3y ago
> WordPress famously used LiteSpeed (and still does) I presume you mean WordPress.com here (WordPress = open source project, WordPress.com = product by co-founder of WordPress; it's confusing). They did run LiteSpeed a long time ago, but haven't in at least a decade; they moved to Nginx. (There's a comment quoted at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6341947 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6341947 from Barry Abrahamson, who's the .com systems guy - sadly, Wired appears to have removed the original. I also checked with colleagues who were there at the time.) Edit: Also, this HN thread might be useful for further info: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4578258 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4578258
- ComputerGuru 3y ago
  Either time flies or the information I feel I recently read that WP.com was still using LS (which surprised me) was incorrect. I stand corrected.

pbowyer 3y ago

"halves the php-fpm base latency" Have you a source for that? I've been having this discussion (that php-fpm is slower than needed) but I haven't found any hard data.

ComputerGuru 3y ago
There are benchmarks readily available if you search “nginx unit php benchmark” (some that show an order of magnitude reduction in latency) without the quotes, but I hesitate to link to any of them as configuring nginx is highly complicated and has so many knobs, particularly with backend upstreams that can be configured in a myriad of ways. My advice would be to try and see.

rmccue 3y ago

> WordPress famously used LiteSpeed (and still does) I presume you mean WordPress.com here (WordPress = open source project, WordPress.com = product by co-founder of WordPress; it's confusing). They did run LiteSpeed a long time ago, but haven't in at least a decade; they moved to Nginx. (There's a comment quoted at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6341947 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6341947 from Barry Abrahamson, who's the .com systems guy - sadly, Wired appears to have removed the original. I also checked with colleagues who were there at the time.) Edit: Also, this HN thread might be useful for further info: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4578258 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4578258

ComputerGuru 3y ago
Either time flies or the information I feel I recently read that WP.com was still using LS (which surprised me) was incorrect. I stand corrected.