Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789
Results 121 to 131 of 131
  1. #121
    It sounds like LiteSpeed Servers were pretty popular 7 months ago, are they still doing well now?

    I'm thinking about switching to them but just want to make sure nothing has changed since then...

    Thanks for the help
    Last edited by bear; 01-02-2011 at 11:45 AM.

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    62
    If you have budget and you need apache compatible .htaccess, go with litespeed.
    Otherwise, consider lighttpd or nginx (I prefer nginx over anything)

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    819
    Quote Originally Posted by muratzilla View Post
    If you have budget and you need apache compatible .htaccess, go with litespeed.
    Otherwise, consider lighttpd or nginx (I prefer nginx over anything)
    I use to use Lightspeed but have stopped using it because of the price. I couldn't afford it, so I switched to Apache + nginx. Nginx handles the images, CSS and JavaScript while Apache processes the PHP requests.

  4. #124
    LiteSpeed is so great.
    I've use it before 2-3 months ago.
    Now on my New Server I'm gonna take it.

    Thanks.

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    491
    Quote Originally Posted by CH-Shaun View Post
    I use to use Lightspeed but have stopped using it because of the price. I couldn't afford it, so I switched to Apache + nginx. Nginx handles the images, CSS and JavaScript while Apache processes the PHP requests.
    Consider adding mod_ruid2 for the PHP requests. It's much faster than the default Apache PHP.
    Brent Presley - brent@innoscale.net
    Innovative Scaling Technologies Inc. - Enterprise Cloud Hosting and Support
    24/7 Dedicated Support, Call us @ 1-888-722-8515
    www.innoscale.net - Ashburn - Dallas - Seattle - Amsterdam

  6. #126
    I use litespeed in my server for 2 years,maybe 3,is not faster than nginx,
    i can say that in a server with all the kinds of sites, tubes/forums/joomla cmd/static pages litespeed was using 2 times more CPU power/i had double load, BUT when i tried to migrate to nginx i had really a lot of problems and i lost 2 weeks and money paying people to fix all problems, problems with out end and at the end i returned back to the litespeed.
    Their support (litespeed) is one of the worst i ever seen and the rates are the same with 2-3 years ago when the max cores of a server were 8.
    This is my experiense with litespeed and nginx.

    Ps: Sorry for my english

  7. #127
    I just switched from Apache to Litespeed, and right now I'm in the process of installing some things for cPanel / WHM. I will be sure to let everyone know how it all goes like in a week or so to give me time to test drive it.

  8. #128
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,197
    We use LiteSpeed along with Varnish and it's great. Couldn't ask for a better web server
    GreenValueHost - YOU deserve the world on a gold platter. We want to give it to you.
    PURE SSD Shared/Reseller HostingDDoS Protected Shared/Reseller Hosting
    [!] We have a 1 YEAR NO QUESTIONS ASKED money back guarantee! [!]
    100% Customer Satisfaction Guaranteed!

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Tampa, FL =)
    Posts
    1,748
    LiteSpeed works to a point. If you run a 16thread server like we do, you won't even begin to utilize all that power unless you buy a higher end lic. which in shared hosting you can't typically cover the expenses.

    nginx/php-fpm really does a good job for a free configuration.

  10. #130
    Quote Originally Posted by TravisT-[SSS] View Post
    LiteSpeed works to a point. If you run a 16thread server like we do, you won't even begin to utilize all that power unless you buy a higher end lic. which in shared hosting you can't typically cover the expenses.

    nginx/php-fpm really does a good job for a free configuration.
    On 16 thread server you need max 2 licenses to serve static material, all rest of threads are for php/sql. So it's not true that you need higher end license.

    I'm using it over 3 years and I'm very happy with it.

  11. #131
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    334
    Using it for couple of years now, apart from a few issues with running xCachce/APC along with it and having instead having to stick with EAccelerator + Memcache, there is nothing bad I can think of.

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789

Related Posts from theWHIR.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •