#1 2019-01-24 13:57:48

jogibjorn
Trusted Member
Registered: 2018-11-17
Posts: 29

Which light weight web server would you recommend on a 128mb server?

Looking for something that can run a basic static website or at most php driven. Thinking of perhaps Nginx or Lighttpd. Suggestions?

Offline

#2 2019-01-24 14:18:19

AnthonySmith
Low End Boss
From: ~/
Registered: 2013-02-13
Posts: 3,952
Website

Re: Which light weight web server would you recommend on a 128mb server?

I personally prefer lighttpd


https://upto32.com retro gaming and nostalgia forum that does not take itself to seriously smile

Offline

#3 2019-01-25 13:22:27

mikho
Low End Mod
From: Hell and gore == Sweden
Registered: 2013-03-02
Posts: 1,766
Website

Re: Which light weight web server would you recommend on a 128mb server?

Both options are good.

Havent seen which one is ”best” in terms of lowest ram footprint and/or performance.
I would say whatever feels the easiest to configure.

Offline

#4 2019-01-27 12:29:50

WSS
Trusted Member
Registered: 2016-12-22
Posts: 461

Re: Which light weight web server would you recommend on a 128mb server?

mini_httpd - it can fork out to CGI and has a very minor load; which is why it is used for most consumer routers from ~2003 to 2012ish.


RbyeR4Nm.png

Offline

#5 2019-03-23 06:37:45

poissonlet
Trusted Member
Registered: 2019-03-23
Posts: 6

Re: Which light weight web server would you recommend on a 128mb server?

I used Lighttpd on a 128MB RAM NAT box and it works really well. My only issue with Lighttpd is that configuring SSL using Let's Encrypt certbot was a little troublesome compared to the automated setup for Apache/Nginx, but that aside, Lighttpd flies with flat-file CMSes.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB