Cherokee Web Server | Hacker News Reader

Cherokee Web Server

cherokee-project.com

26 pointsjacquesm22 comments

I run Cherokee at my company, and have found it fast / secure and rarely do I ever use the graphical admin.

For reference I have roughly 4000 servers running it at any given time.

It'd be nice if Cherokee had a "Cherokee In Production" section that listed a couple companies/websites that use Cherokee. Benchmarks are nice but I'd rather see it in action.

Are native Americans simply exempt from the basic courtesy of not being depicted as ridiculous cartoons?

Apparently not. The Apache feather is much more tasteful.

I'll ask a Cleveland Indian next time I see one of them...

You're kidding, right? You think they are the only ones drawn as ridiculous cartoons? Every ethnicity in the world has been cartoon-ized, for both positive and negative reasons.

Ehn, it's a cartoon, but it's not a caricature - we're not talking a beet-red, freaky-looking sports mascot, after all.

I'm not sure it's really any worse than using a tribe's name for a project like Apache or Cherokee in the first place.

Does no one remember how Apache got its name? It's "a patchy web server."

And?

It's not the Patchy web server, it's "Apache". "Patch" or "Patchy" doesn't evoke "feather".

Claim-to-fame: a pretty web-admin.

I'd be more interested if it was a pretty web-admin on top of one of the established web-servers.

To be fair, that and being faster than both nginx and lighthttpd. I don't know anything about it but to say its only claim to fame is the web admin isn't quite accurate.

I would like to see some benchmarks, please.

My experience is that Cherokee is a pet httpd for a few devout newbs who find Apache to heavy on Windows XP, and pretty much nothing else.

Saying it's faster than nginx is a big claim, and I would like to see its proxying, load-balancing, URL rewriting, and big file serving performance. For starters.

http://www.cherokee-project.com/benchmarks.html pretty easy to find them.

Will do another benchmark of my own, but on Windows it had a pretty much standard, Apache-grade webserver performance.

could you try with a higher concurrent client count as well?

ab -n 10000000 -c 1000 is my standard, since we serve ads.

if you work for a company where writing extensions to the server is common-place, i would say the code quality of cherokee is a strong feature as well.

Cherokee also tries to use HTTP 1.1 keepalive to upstream processes. NGiNX uses HTTP 1.0. I doubt this matters in most use cases however.

I heard somewhere this is used by chat roulette - would love to know more about how you'd set up a streaming video / webcam service using Cherokee.

I'd bet they use Red5 or Flash Media Server for the video streaming features, last time I checked they were the only game in town.

I'm pretty sure Chatroulette uses Adobe Stratus (http://labs.wip3.adobe.com/technologies/stratus/) for video, which is peer to peer.

So, as you can see, Cherokee is the fastest and best designed among the modern web servers.

How does this statement hold up against YAWS?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com