Will there be a performance gain by using Apache’s mod_proxy to proxy off static file requests to Lighttpd/nginx

apache-2.2lighttpdmod-proxyreverse-proxy

I know there are lot of tutorials out there which suggest the use either nginx or lighttpd on port 80 and proxy dynamic requests to apache running on a different port. I am not ready to take that leap yet for my VPS. However I could definitely try the reverse scenario.

i.e. use apache's mod_proxy to proxy requests to nginx/lighttpd running on a different port.

But does that even make sense? will there be a performance gain if I use the reverse setup?

Best Answer

No. The performance on that is pretty much guaranteed to be significantly worse than just serving the static content out of Apache.

Furthermore, I don't think the performance gains to be had (if any) from serving static content from nginx outweigh the downsides of proxying dynamic requests back to Apache -- that is to say, the "conventional wisdom" embodied in the "lot of tutorials" is just plain wrong, stupid, and generally unnecessary (who would have thought it -- bad information on the Internet?). I'd be willing to wear the idea of using nginx to serve static assets from a separate assets domain, on a separate IP (even if it's on the same box), but I don't think proxying webserver to webserver makes sense.

Related Solutions

Httpd – mod_proxy and trailing slashes

Read carefully the section on ProxyPass in Apache httpd documentation (http://httpd.apache.org/docs/current/mod/mod_proxy.html). You can likely get around this behavior by explicitly specifying the trailing / for both arguments of the ProxyPass directive

ProxyPass   /my-web-app/      http://blah.example.com/some-other-path/

Nginx + php-fpm VS Nginx as a reverse proxy for Apache

Reverse proxying is slower and generally worse, however, some reasons to use it is to maintain (some) compatibility with .htaccess files (which you would have to write (and that isn't always practical) is you use a pure nginx setup) or if you require specific apache modules. (Some may argue that is you have these requirements, it is easier to just use apache.)

PHP-FPM with nginx would be the preferred solution - you get the fast static file serving of nginx and good PHP performance without adding additional overhead, proxying, or the (typically) significant memory usage of apache.
nginx+PHP-FPM is (typically) faster and uses less memory. Nginx + Apache + FastCGI/FPM will still serve static files fast, but will have additional overhead on the dynamic files (not as bad as mod_php, but worse than if you eliminate apache).
You will need a bit of both - nginx would need to know how to deal with the paths (e.g. for serving static files, denying access to .htaccess, etc) and apache will need to know how to handle the files. In some cases, if your .htaccess file doesn't pertain to static files (so every request that needs rewriting is going to go to apache), then it may be acceptable to simply deny access to certain locations, and have apache do the rest via .htaccess - it doesn't seem ideal, will cost a bit in performance, and its reliability is questionable - but it could work on a simple setup).

If you can, go with the straight nginx+PHP-FPM setup. If you can't, while there may be some merits to reverse-proxying, think through the repercussions, especially if you are dependent on .htaccess files.

Best Answer

Related Solutions

Httpd – mod_proxy and trailing slashes

Nginx + php-fpm VS Nginx as a reverse proxy for Apache

Related Topic