F5 Networks Acquiring NGINX For $670 Million

[phoronix]

Phoronix: F5 Networks Acquiring NGINX For $670 Million

F5 Networks, a cloud application services firm, is acquiring NGINX Inc as the company behind the open-source, lightweight NGINX web-server...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=F5-Acquiring-NGINX

[Guest]

I know nothing about F5 Networks, but hopefully the open-source NGINX continues being good. I don't quite feel like re-figuring out Apache any time soon on my home servers

[q2dg]

I know nothing about F5 Networks, but hopefully the open-source NGINX continues being good. I don't quite feel like re-figuring out Apache any time soon on my home servers

Apache can do everything Nginx can and much more, so I don't see the problem. In fact, maybe the free/open path will be clearer hereinafter

[brrrrttttt]

I have mostly replaced nginx with haproxy these days. Still need something for static content though...

[uid313]

An argument in favor of Nginx over Apache was that Nginx used to be much faster back in the days.
Now with Apache 2.4 which uses the event-driven design using epoll instead of the old forking design, it is very fast and performance is on par with Nginx.

Are Erlang, Go and Rust better languages for a web server than C and C++?

Nginx is suitable for static file serving, such as from a CDN.
Apache is suited for dynamic content such as hosting web applications.
Lighttpd is not as popular as Nginx and Apache but it seems good too.

[zoomblab]

phoronix Out of curiosity, do want to share your infrastructure setup for this site?

[Hibbelharry]

As long as we are talking about static content, Apache is still lagging behind to noticeable degree, but not as far as it used to be. Dynamic content performance is absolutely on par. Nginx on the other side is a real bitch in shared setups, where multiple users need to put in their own rules, without being able to break others services. I've been running into issues with this quite often, so i'm not using nginx in new projects anymore.

[polarathene]

As long as we are talking about static content, Apache is still lagging behind to noticeable degree, but not as far as it used to be. Dynamic content performance is absolutely on par. Nginx on the other side is a real bitch in shared setups, where multiple users need to put in their own rules, without being able to break others services. I've been running into issues with this quite often, so i'm not using nginx in new projects anymore.

Use containers? I have individual sites running their own nginx instances(or apache) with another nginx container as a reverse proxy that connects the domains to their related container. Considering using HAProxy or Traefik instead for the reverse proxy though.

[tuxd3v]

Another Amazing European product, out of the OpenSource market in some years..
Russians tend to be slow in progression, but because they like optimisation and classe, and we saw that in NGinx very well.

Apache can do everything Nginx can and much more, so I don't see the problem. In fact, maybe the free/open path will be clearer hereinafter

Apache is not in the Same league that NGinx is..
That's why is has been substituted by NGinx by major players..

Although Apache can do more things,
It doesn't do them well, at least not well enough as NGinx..
Its Big and Fat,
But also its older, and here of course it has the heavy price of older design..

NGinx, is very powerful, and has beautiful ways to configure it..
For me its sad, even tough the money here speaks higher for the time Igor spent on it..

[F.Ultra]

An argument in favor of Nginx over Apache was that Nginx used to be much faster back in the days.
Now with Apache 2.4 which uses the event-driven design using epoll instead of the old forking design, it is very fast and performance is on par with Nginx.

Are Erlang, Go and Rust better languages for a web server than C and C++?

Nginx is suitable for static file serving, such as from a CDN.
Apache is suited for dynamic content such as hosting web applications.
Lighttpd is not as popular as Nginx and Apache but it seems good too.

My major gripe with Apache is the config files that just feels way to complicated and (at least by the default setup in Debian/Ubuntu) suffers big from the lets-split-config-into-2-millions-files-all-over syndrome.

Been using lighttpd for many years now with great success, kinda biased since I have quite a number of patches in lighttpd which also makes me understand and know much better how and why it does things as compared with say Nginx.