Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Cherokee vs nginx: What are the differences?
Introduction
Cherokee and nginx are both web servers used to serve content over the internet. However, they have some key differences that make them unique in their own ways.
Scalability: Cherokee is known for its high scalability and performance. It is designed to handle a large number of concurrent connections efficiently, making it suitable for high-traffic websites. On the other hand, nginx is built with an asynchronous, event-driven architecture, which allows it to handle a massive number of concurrent connections with low memory usage. This makes nginx an ideal choice for handling high loads and a large number of requests.
Configuration: Cherokee has a user-friendly graphical interface called the Cherokee-admin, which allows users to configure the server easily without the need for editing configuration files manually. It provides a simple, web-based interface for managing various aspects of the server configuration. In contrast, nginx relies on configuration files that need to be edited manually. While this may require a bit more technical knowledge, it provides more flexibility and control over the server configuration.
Module Support: Cherokee offers a wide range of built-in modules that provide additional functionalities like load balancing, caching, and SSL/TLS support. These modules can be easily enabled or disabled as per the requirements of the website. On the other hand, nginx has a smaller set of built-in modules, but it supports a vast number of third-party modules contributed by the community. This allows users to extend the functionality of nginx by adding additional modules depending on their specific needs.
Operating System Support: Cherokee is primarily designed for Unix-like operating systems, such as Linux and macOS. It is not officially supported on Windows. In contrast, nginx is designed to be highly portable and provides official support for a wide range of operating systems, including Windows, Linux, macOS, and FreeBSD. This makes nginx a more versatile choice for users who require cross-platform compatibility.
Memory Footprint: Cherokee has a smaller memory footprint compared to nginx. It is designed to be lightweight and efficient, ensuring optimal performance even with limited resources. Nginx, although highly efficient in terms of performance, has a slightly higher memory consumption due to its event-driven architecture and additional features. This makes Cherokee a suitable choice for environments where memory resources are constrained.
Community and Documentation: Nginx has a larger and more active community compared to Cherokee, which translates into more resources, tutorials, and plugins available for users. Nginx also has extensive documentation and a well-maintained official website, making it easier for users to find assistance and resolve issues. While Cherokee has an active community, it may be comparatively harder to find the same level of community support and resources as available for nginx.
In summary, Cherokee and nginx differ in terms of scalability, configuration management, module support, operating system compatibility, memory footprint, and community/documentation resources.
I am diving into web development, both front and back end. I feel comfortable with administration, scripting and moderate coding in bash, Python and C++, but I am also a Windows fan (i love inner conflict). What are the votes on web servers? IIS is expensive and restrictive (has Windows adoption of open source changed this?) Apache has the history but seems to be at the root of most of my Infosec issues, and I know nothing about nginx (is it too new to rely on?). And no, I don't know what I want to do on the web explicitly, but hosting and data storage (both cloud and tape) are possibilities. Ready, aim fire!
I would pick nginx over both IIS and Apace HTTP Server any day. Combine it with docker, and as you grow maybe even traefik, and you'll have a really flexible solution for serving http content where you can take sites and projects up and down without effort, easily move it between systems and dont have to handle any dependencies on your actual local machine.
From a StackShare Community member: "We are a LAMP shop currently focused on improving web performance for our customers. We have made many front-end optimizations and now we are considering replacing Apache with nginx. I was wondering if others saw a noticeable performance gain or any other benefits by switching."
I use nginx because it is very light weight. Where Apache tries to include everything in the web server, nginx opts to have external programs/facilities take care of that so the web server can focus on efficiently serving web pages. While this can seem inefficient, it limits the number of new bugs found in the web server, which is the element that faces the client most directly.
I use nginx because its more flexible and easy to configure
I use Apache HTTP Server because it's intuitive, comprehensive, well-documented, and just works
For us, NGINX is a lite HTTP server easy to configure. On our research, we found a well-documented software we a lot of support from the community.
We have been using it alongside tools like certbot and it has been a total success.
We can easily configure our sites and have a folder for available vs enabled sites, and with the nginx -t command we can easily check everything is running fine.
- Server rendered HTML output from PHP is being migrated to the client as Vue.js components, future plans to provide additional content, and other new miscellaneous features all result in a substantial increase of static files needing to be served from the server. NGINX has better performance than Apache for serving static content.
- The change to NGINX will require switching from PHP to PHP-FPM resulting in a distributed architecture with a higher complexity configuration, but this is outweighed by PHP-FPM being faster than PHP for processing requests.
- The NGINX + PHP-FPM setup now allows for horizontally scaling of resources rather vertically scaling the previously combined Apache + PHP resources.
- PHP shell tasks can now efficiently be decoupled from the application reducing main application footprint and allow for scaling of tasks on an individual basis.
Pros of Cherokee
- The logo is cute4
Pros of NGINX
- High-performance http server1.4K
- Performance894
- Easy to configure730
- Open source607
- Load balancer530
- Free289
- Scalability288
- Web server226
- Simplicity175
- Easy setup136
- Content caching30
- Web Accelerator21
- Capability15
- Fast14
- High-latency12
- Predictability12
- Reverse Proxy8
- The best of them7
- Supports http/27
- Great Community5
- Lots of Modules5
- Enterprise version5
- High perfomance proxy server4
- Embedded Lua scripting3
- Streaming media delivery3
- Streaming media3
- Reversy Proxy3
- Blash2
- GRPC-Web2
- Lightweight2
- Fast and easy to set up2
- Slim2
- saltstack2
- Virtual hosting1
- Narrow focus. Easy to configure. Fast1
- Along with Redis Cache its the Most superior1
- Ingress controller1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Cherokee
Cons of NGINX
- Advanced features require subscription10