I wonder if it is only marketing aspect if we use . LiteSpeed and WP will have a faster speed.
As I understand it is main problem using RAM.
The only way to know for certain is install litespeed and another server and benchmark it for your site.
On the whole I don’t think there is a lot of difference between webservers nowadays anymore. The main differences are in what features they have and how easy those are to configure. Performance-wise they’re all fast. Unless you’re still using apache2 with mod_php maybe, then you’ll notice a difference.
Can you check interesting article:
https://chemicloud.com/blog/litespeed-vs-nginx-vs-apache/
I understand specifications and testing but how is it possible Apache is showing the same source and bigger Total Page Size: 871 KB and
LiteSpeed lower Total Page Size: 270 KB
Is it website resource the same? PageSpeed means double faster in this case as it is a lower number.
That question is also below the article. The answer is due to difference in compression between the different webservers.
So, it is not an issue with the base and the same amount of Page size. Thank you for the message!
I’m curious about the above statement, please elaborate or recommend some links detailing the problems.
Please have a look at https://www.cloudways.com/blog/php-fpm-on-cloud/
mod_php is generally slower because of higher overhead.
Many thanks for the informative link, I will have to check the setup when I’m back on the desktop.
Hopefully because the relatively new operating systems I’m running the following setup has been enabled:
For servers launched after this announcement dated August 23rd, 2016, PHP-FPM has been enabled by default. For new server instances, mod_PHP has been retired by default. For servers launched before August 23rd, you can enable PHP-FPM by going over this step-by-step guide.
This topic was automatically closed 91 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.