In a 2 X Quad Xeon server with 16GB RAM and 2 X 500GB on DirectAdmin.
IOwait is less than 10% most of the times.
So litespeed told me to go with a 2 CPU core license.
1. So since i going with 2 CPU core license. It will only make 2 cores user litespeed for PHP out of 8 cores? what other cores gonna do? only static content? Or other cores gonna use Apache for php? can you plz explain.
2. Do we have to configure cache like mod_cache, mod_disk_cache, and mod_mem_cache etc with litespeed too? Or it has its own methods of caching?
3. Should use their PHP LiteSpeed SAPI over normal PHP? Is there any compatibility problems with scripts like Vbulletin, jamroom?
Anyone happen to know the difference between the two and whether or not I'll notice the difference between them?
For example, many, many, many, many moons ago, in a far away land, there used to be a difference between Windows and Linux for perl scripts. In fact, if you couldn't re-write half the script, some of them just didn't work right on a windows host.
Are there any differences like that between lightspeed and apache, or is it all pretty much the same and doesn't really matter?
I'm now running litespeed server to power sites on a VPS. Currently, a site is working without https access normally. However, when you access the site via HTTPS (SSL), I recieve ioncube is not loaded. Comparing the phpinfo, it appears that the https is loading the old configuration of phpinfo, what's worse, is that it's loading PHP 4. Both however, load the same PHP configuration file.
when I type "top" into ssh I see 3 proccesses of lshttpd, 2 are running by nobody, 1 by root., lsws is installed as nobody:nobody. Also, I see 2 lsphp5 processes, by nobody both. I have 4 virtual hosts configured. Are those proccesses normal, I think there should be only 1 proccess lshttpd and lsphp5.
Can you check if you are running litespeed how many proccesses of lshttpd you have?
I started a thread last night to get some opinions as I am trying to find a new host & now am coming up with another question... Apache vs Litespeed. A cpanel is important to me, which I am not sure is possible with Litespeed & a highly rated company that offers LS, Medialayer, doesn't offer phone support which is mandatory to me. Can't find many companies that offer Litespeed & everything else that I need.
So as not to repeat, please see the tread I started last night to get the gist of my needs. I also another opinion over there on Liquidweb. See:
I tried searching for it on google but couldn't find any server company offering VPS using Litespeed instead of Apache. Yes, I know that Apache could be optimized, but would like to try a VPS or dedicated server with Litespeed, just for testing and learning to use and troubleshoot Litespeed. Does anybody here know of a supplier? I would need less than 10 gigs, 250+ Ram as well as cPanel.
I installed lsws without apache conf file(httpd.conf). Then I created a new virtual host in "suEXEC" Template. I added a new user via SSH and made home dir for him and chowned his home dir + all his files to hisusername:hisusername. His home dir(/home/user/) is chmoded to 755 and his /public_html to 711. It worked fine but after that I installed phpbb3 forum and when I tried to chmod config.php to 600 I got an error on the forum:
Fatal error: require() [function.require]: Failed opening required './config.php' (include_path='.:/usr/local/lib/php') in /home/username/public_html/common.php on line 127
When I was using lsws with apache conf file and I had configured suEXEC + suPHP for apache I was able to chmod config file to 600 and it worked fine. I have no idea what could be the problem now.
It works fine when I chmod config.php to 755 but for security reasons I would need a way to configure it to 600. LiteSpeed si running as nobody:nobody. EX. APP settings: LSAPI App $VH_NAME_lsphp uds://tmp/lshttpd/$VH_NAME_lsphp.sock
I got new server for free image hosting services, I was reading up about lite speed and it seems faster for this type of need however i do not have money to buy enterprise edition now, standard edition which is free but it says only 150 concurrent connection, means i can't have more than 150 ppl viewing a image? please advice or do stick with our great Apache which free
We run a quite intensive web and found some performance tests about LiteSpeed Ent. Our site is Apache + PHP driven. Is it worth to pay for LiteSpeed Ent ? Is the performance increase really significant?
if there is any difference between apache & litespeed? Performance wise I know litespeed would be better. But in terms of configuration wise, compatitibility wise and some other factors, how different would it be for apache & litespeed?
My concern is if I were to change from apache to litespeed, would my webhosting customers know how to use it in 1 way or another? like permissions and stuff.
i would like to use Litespeed webserver from my server.i installed and run Litespeed from my server. but i dont know how to config. when i start the Litespeed webserver i have an error to please install Zend. Please help me to install zend and if you know whats my need for install please help me to done.
I use cPanel - Dedicated Server i can control the Litespeed from the cPanel WHM.
I'm having a problem with litespeed and apache, every time when I reboot the server listespeed and apache(both) are started and the server uses apache. I configured litespeed to use a conf file of apache so I can't remove just apache. I need a way when I restart the server litespeed is started and apache is stoped
2nd problem. how to make this in a batch script The script will backup a directory every month and I need in every backup get a date like this directoryname-date(day/month/year)
I've been testing out LiteSpeed on a few of my servers, extremely pleased with it! Only issue I have left are directory indexes. A good chunk of my users store files and rely on Apache directory indexing to serve up the content. With LiteSpeed, the default behavior for a folder with no default document is to display nothing at all. I've looked through the documentation and found that LiteSpeed does have the functionality, but I'm having some issue getting it to actually work.
Can someone tell me exactly where the index files for LiteSpeed are placed, what to configure, etc?
I was just playing around with litespeed and I thought I would switch back to apache for a few min to see how the server reacts. The load with litespeed was 1.00 - 3.00. I switched to apache the load jumped to 28.00 - 35.00. Its amazing how litespeed is handling connections.
I know most webhosts run Apache and it seems to server their needs very well. However LiteSpeed is new and fast, assuming you have relatively static content. At least that's what I've heard. Beyond this, I don't know much, though a year ago I worked with a guy who hosted an iPhone software repository (smallish files, huge demand), and he put LiteSpeed on the servers to deal with the load. Running at 30+ Mbps, with spikes above 60, the server never went above 0.2 load as far as I remember, and it was just a 2GB Core 2 Duo E6300 1.86 GHz machine.