This is a read-only archive. Find the latest Linux articles, documentation, and answers at the new!

Abyss: a small, sweet Web server

Posted by: Anonymous [ip:] on February 22, 2008 04:29 AM
I honestly see nothing in this article, the software's site, or in the searches I've done to suggest that this is in any way better. In particular, the advertised performance advantage is decreased memory footprint, but no information seems to be available about that. Apache can have a very small footprint if you don't load all the modules on earth; with a pretty full-featured config and the event MPM in 2.3, I see less than a 3MB footprint in RAM (223MB of virtual memory is reported, presumably mostly libs) and at most 7 processes, after pounding it a bit with 70,000 connections+requests. Abyss only uses 8MB (only one proc), but uses 80% of CPU time versus about 40% total for Apache 2.3 (which can be distributed across my two cores) ...

Considering the large amount of information and modules for Apache, I think I'm sticking with it ...


Return to Abyss: a small, sweet Web server