Anyone using Litespeed?

[Zhana]

Hello,

Anyone here using litespeed? I'd like to know if Litespeed is better and faster than Apache and if it's a good decision to switch to litespeed.


TY.

[Bono]

I'm using Litespeed for over 2 years now, it is a lot faster with static content, dynamic in my experience is not that much faster. I still keep LSWS on my server because it is much harder to kill web server compared to Apache.

[Gary.]

Litespeed is much faster and more secure than standard apache but then there is the word "tweeking"
Shame though as they change 14USD a month for it :(

[Gary.]

I did some looking about after this post and used the LITESPEED addon for WHM.

I tested with a trial which is only 2CORE, But there was a HUGE performance increase ! Speeds and other things, Now I did say this did LIMIT me to 2 core - Yet my machine is 4 core xeon so if the proper version ( Unlimited core ) was in use, I would see my server running at best eprformance.

Im happy and I mass email all clients I host - They came back and said there is a HUGE page load increase.

http://www.litespeedtech.com/litespeed-web-server-downloads.html

Get Free 15-Day Trial (2-CPU) License. Enterprise Edition will not function without a valid license.

[Zhana]

Same situation here mate. I have Quad Xeon server and if I buy a license for 1 CPU, it will be waste of 3 cores.

[Bono]

Wrong, with 2 core license you can utilize all 4 cores, when serving static content you are limited to 2 cores, but when serving dynamic you are serving with external app so you can max out all the cores.

External apps are not limited with LSWS license. I got Quad Xeon and with 1 core license my all cores are full, because most of load comes from dynamic load, and only few percent from static hosting.

[Zhana]

Thank you Bono.

I might require your expertise when I move to LiteSpeed, if that's ok with you.

[Bono]

Thank you Bono.

I might require your expertise when I move to LiteSpeed, if that's ok with you.

OK sure, and advantage of LiteSpeed over Apache is also memory usage, so if were adding more and more memory when you switch to LiteSpeed almost all it would be unused. My memory usage was 3GB out of 4, and not it is 1.1GB out of 4. Mysql usage is around 500mb.

         	total   	used   	free 	shared	buffers 	cached

Mem:      	4053   	3864    	189      	0    	171   	2658

-/+ buffers/cache:   	1034   	3019

Swap:     	2047     	41   	2006

Here it is what I talked about, only lshttpd process is limited with core license and you can see how much I use it. lsphp5 is external process which is not limited with x core licensing. My load is little high right now, because i'm under attack for almost 2 weeks now.

top - 15:58:54 up 168 days, 12:22,  1 user,  load average: 1.97, 1.96, 1.85

Tasks: 186 total,   2 running, 184 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie

Cpu(s):  9.9%us,  9.9%sy, 47.5%ni, 31.4%id,  1.0%wa,  0.0%hi,  0.2%si,  0.0%st

Mem:   4151104k total,  3975280k used,   175824k free,   174144k buffers

Swap:  2096440k total,	42012k used,  2054428k free,  2740480k cached


  PID USER  	PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEM	TIME+  COMMAND                                                            	

 3042 mysql 	10  -5  494m 465m 3752 S   73 11.5  50945:55 mysqld                                                         		

14418 nobody	16   1  293m  26m  22m S   49  0.7   1:37.73 lsphp5                                                         		

14419 nobody	17   1  293m  26m  22m S   49  0.7   2:04.94 lsphp5                                                         		

14576 nobody	17   1  293m  24m  20m R   48  0.6   2:09.14 lsphp5                                                         		

15506 nobody	17   1  294m  21m  16m S   48  0.5   0:13.87 lsphp5                                                         		

15414 nobody	16   1  292m  19m  16m S	2  0.5   0:42.03 lsphp5                                                         		

 2565 nobody	15   0  9932 7732  548 S	1  0.2   0:27.42 lshttpd                                                            	

[Gaffney]

My host installed litespeed a little while ago and my site, forum and wordpress kept on getting white pages with these errors:

PHP Fatal error: Out of memory (allocated 786432) (tried to allocate 17 bytes) in /home/celticta/public_html/forum/admin/sources/base/ipsRegistry.php on line 2715

PHP Fatal error: Out of memory (allocated 3670016) (tried to allocate 30720 bytes) in /home/celticta/public_html/forum/admin/applications_addon/other/shoutbox/modules_public/ajax/coreAjax.php on line 1161

PHP Fatal error: Out of memory (allocated 2097152) (tried to allocate 2 bytes) in /home/celticta/public_html/forum/ips_kernel/classDbMysqliClient.php on line 464

PHP Fatal error: Out of memory (allocated 1835008) (tried to allocate 71 bytes) in /home/celticta/public_html/forum/admin/sources/base/ipsRegistry.php on line 2872

PHP Fatal error: Out of memory (allocated 262144) (tried to allocate 16 bytes) in /home/celticta/public_html/forum/admin/sources/base/core.php on line 0

I have 256mb of Memory, for some reason the amount of memory is being limited for these files, these problems have only popped up under litespeed, most of them have been smoothed out. It could be some bad code or a certain mod, has anyone experienced this sort of problem ?

Here is my error log:
http://forum.celtictalk.org/error_log

[Bono]

They allocated too small amount of memory in php, maybe you got in your homedir php.ini and you can change memory values there.

[.time]

I refuse to use a web server whose license tells me what I can and cannot host.

[TCWT]

I'm using Litespeed on my forums. It's very resilient to dos attacks and cpu/memory usage have dropped significantly. Well worth the money.

[Zhana]

Thanks for your input TCWT.

[Taylor J]

I am using the same host as Gaffeney, so yes I am using litespeed, it is much faster and hasn't messed up any of my sites yet.

[MarcusInMd]

We use litespeed and it's a great product. It reduced our server load significantly. Apache would crash all of the time under marginal situations.

I will however tell you this about Litespeed web server. It is NOT fully compatible with mod_security. Some of the rules will cause significant problems with php and mysql sites.

[Gary.]

I will however tell you this about Litespeed web server. It is NOT fully compatible with mod_security. Some of the rules will cause significant problems with php and mysql sites.

I host over 80IPB boards - Since we went to Litespeed, Everyone is praising me !
We have no issues atall - Not a single error !

It all depends on the setup to be honest with you, After I installed LiteSpeed PHP - I then installed the latest eAccelerater - I disabled the eAccelerator Cache folder and made it use a temp one with I created.

makedir /dev/ev
chmod 777 /dev/ea

I made a cron to run every 5 mins to clear this folder - Buy doing this cpu dropped by 80% !

OPCode is the best solution with litespeed.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

If you're interested in going faster but don't want to pay for litespeed, check out lighttpd. It's not Apache-interchangeable, but it supports the usual features (redirects, rewriting, fastcgi, etc.) while being much lighter on RAM.

We started using it when we were on a memory-limited VPS and never bothered switching back.

[Gary.]

Yeah your right in a way...

Let me say though - Paying is for a reason !

Do a security benchmark test on litehttp and then one on litespeed.

1 billion% you will revert :shifty:

Also - fastCGI is great for IPB - you want performace yeah (w00t) Disabling this is like taking your wheels of a car

( Flintstones style ) :unsure:

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Oh - to be clear, I switched from Apache, not from litespeed. We don't have the sort of budget to pay for litespeed, and our current site performance is rather good. Correctly configuring mod_expires for CSS and JavaScript cut our bandwidth usage by about a third, and made things faster to boot.

Some day, if I need to get extra performance, I'll go about setting up Varnish...

[Gary.]

Just use the 15 demo - You will like it ;)

[Zhana]

Thanks for your input Gary. BTW can you help with setting it up?


Thank you.

[MarcusInMd]

I host over 80IPB boards - Since we went to Litespeed, Everyone is praising me !

We have no issues atall - Not a single error !

It all depends on the setup to be honest with you, After I installed LiteSpeed PHP - I then installed the latest eAccelerater - I disabled the eAccelerator Cache folder and made it use a temp one with I created.

makedir /dev/ev

chmod 777 /dev/ea

I made a cron to run every 5 mins to clear this folder - Buy doing this cpu dropped by 80% !

OPCode is the best solution with litespeed.

Gary,
I am running ASL with it's own setup of mod-security rules. Overall it's a more hardened linux install..but it's not without issues with litespeed. Litespeed does not have full support for mod_security which can cause issues. We have had to disable several rules because of it.

But Litespeed is great and is above and beyond apache.

[MarcusInMd]

I'm curious about how you have eaccel. setup. Why delete the cache every five minutes? If the cache is gone - this is defeating the purpose of having the cache no?

[Gary.]

I guess you dont know server management then LOL

Its called OPcode - External cache system which is 90% quicker and does not cunsume CPU resource.

See - Eaccelerator runs from the CPU - So if you give it an external cache system, Like a folder of its own "DISC CACHE" - Now - By doing this going in that folder will fill it up yes ? So thats the point of pruning the folder is to keep the memory usuage low, Or if that folder what uses the cache system will just fill up and consume all your memory - So the more you allow in eAccelerater the faster you format the folder.

I suggest you learn, As basic eAccelerator is just pointless without optimazation (w00t)

let me guess, the php.ini, yours says eAccelerator shm zize is 16 :lol:

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Pardon? The point of a disk cache is that it doesn't use system memory.

If you have spare memory, it's probably even better to run eAccelerator with shm_only = 1, so it doesn't even use the disk cache. Memory is much, much faster, and if you're just running IP.Board, you have a finite number of PHP scripts to be cached. (Not more than a few megabytes worth.) IP.Board also doesn't cache more than a few hundred kilobytes of data in eAccelerator's data cache, so the memory usage will be minimal.

We run xcache with no disk cache whatsoever, and unless it's broken, it does not consume all of the system's memory. It's smarter than that. So is eAccelerator.