Nginx vs. Apache, All Things Considered
-
Hey Peeps,
I've been struggling lately with a new static site, and I'm looking for anyone's opinion who's had to optimize a site using Nginx. I understand that Nginx is recommended for static sites, however I want to avoid being in a situation where I can't do things like write redirect rules the way I want to.
Considering that it will be hosting a Static site, are there any features or functions that Nginx lacks when compared to Apache, such as ability to write rewrite rules, etc.?
-
Great to hear. Let me know if you have any question when you start that project.
Casey
-
Yup, I'm in the same boat as you, I'd much rather do server-side redirects..
As an update on this "project", we used the pageless redirects in our staging environment on S3 just now, but were unsuccessful. Certain redirects that we set up in pageless redirects, (such as adding a trailing slash to URLs without,) got clobbered by S3's default setting of 302ing to adding a trailing slash. Weak sauce, Amazon!
At this point, we're going with Apache, since it's the App that our developers know best and we've had too many problems to experiment with our live environment. This being said, our next project after we relaunch with proper redirects will be to begin testing on our stage with Nginx
Thanks for your input!
-
Hey Danny,
I've always done 301 redirects from the server and avoided any other method. This was more for my sanity to make sure that I was getting all the equity I could if there was a difference, not saying there is a difference but if there way, I wanted to be safe. Since it sounds like you may be constrained by your technology, the solution you are going with is fine but if you had both options available, I'd go with the server side redirect always.
-
Thanks Casey!
We've actually found a different work-around that we are looking at right now, using the "pageless redirects" plugin for Jekyll. Basically it uses the meta refresh + rel canon redirection method that Matt Cutts got called out on a while ago. This would allow us to stay on S3 and maintain our blazing fast site speed.
Through my research so far, this seems to pass equity in much the same way as a Server App 301.. Have you had any experiences/heard anything to the contrary?
-
Hi Danny,
The Moz.com website/blog are running on PHP/Nginx. As Matthew said, Nginx is much faster and less intensive on the servers for both CPU and memory. Nginx has some great documentation and is really easy to get things to redirect. It's as easy as adding lines like the following to your configuration and your good to go:
rewrite ^/q$ /community/q permanent;
rewrite ^/q/(.*)$ /community/q/$1 permanent;Making the switch from Apache to Nginx was one of the best things we ever did and I would highly suggest you do the same thing for both static and any dynamic sites you may have. I'll most likely never use Apache again.
Casey
-
From the little I know of Nginx, I know it is meant to be faster, less intensive on server memory and able to handle more concurrent connections, but Apache is more widely supported across different servers and is more flexible out of the box.
The one thing I have had to get my head around in working on clients sites that run on Nginx is the different URL rewrite rules i.e. http://nginx.org/en/docs/http/converting_rewrite_rules.html
-
Thanks Jeff!
I think we're going to go with Apache for now, since it's what all of us are well-versed in. We'll probably be switching to Nginx at some point in the future, and focusing on other aspects that you mentioned, such as caching and compression, in the meantime.
Cheers.
-
Danny - We use Nginx on our WordPress site, and it's pretty quick and easy. We're able to use the same .htaccess rules to handle rewrites, and for the most part, there's very little downside. You do want to make sure that your site isn't going to break before you launch it on Nginx, so I'd test it with a test URL first before you push it live.
We're also running Varnish as a caching system, and our page load speed takes the page from a slowwww load time to a really fast 1.5 second load time.
Hope this helps...
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Page Speed or Site Speed which one does Google considered a ranking signal
I've read many threads online which proves that website speed is a ranking factor. There's a friend whose website scores 44 (slow metric score) on Google Pagespeed Insights. Despite that his website is slow, he outranks me on Google search results. It confuses me that I optimized my website for speed, but my competitor's slow site outperforms me. On Six9ja.com, I did amazing work by getting my target score which is 100 (fast metric score) on Google Pagespeed Insights. Coming to my Google search console tool, they have shown that some of my pages have average scores, while some have slow scores. Google search console tool proves me wrong that none of my pages are fast. Then where did the fast metrics went? Could it be because I added three Adsense Javascript code to all my blog posts? If so, that means that Adsense code is slowing website speed performance despite having an async tag. I tested my blog post speed and I understand that my page speed reduced by 48 due to the 3 Adsense javascript codes added to it. I got 62 (Average metric score). Now, my site speed is=100, then my page speed=62 Does this mean that Google considers page speed rather than site speed as a ranking factor? Screenshots: https://imgur.com/a/YSxSwOG Regarding: https://etcnaija.com
Technical SEO | | etcna0 -
Image & Video Sitemaps - Submitted vs. Indexed
Hi Mozzers, I have read all the relevant blogs from media indexing experts like Phil Nottingham and have followed Google's best practice as well as advice from similar discussions on here. We have submitted video and image sitemaps to WT, and the image sitemap has 33 indexed from 720 submitted images, and the video 170 indexed from 738 submitted. With the image sitemap the number (33) has remained steady while the submitted has grown by over 100 in the last month. The video has shown signs of indexing new videos however but still not the amount that were submitted. Thus far, I have followed the guidelines sitemap structure as per Google. We are using Cloudfront so I have added and verified our cloudfront server in the same WT account. If anyone has any advice, it would be most appreciated. There is no duplicate content and the robots.txt is not blocking anything within the sitemap. Image sitemap: view-source:http://www.clowdy.com/sitemap.images.xml
Technical SEO | | Morrreau0 -
NGINX 301 configuration - it is correct?
I'm totally not an expert in Technical Seo... but i am worry that my server admin neither is. Below is his vhost configuration, anyone can check this? it's this correct and SEO friendly? server { listen *:80; server_name domainaddress.pl domainaddress.com.pl; root /home/www/domainaddress.pl/web; index index.html index.htm key-words.php index.php index.cgi index.pl index.xhtml; location /key {
Technical SEO | | Nemo85
rewrite ^/key-words/$ http://domainaddress.pl/ permanent;
rewrite ^/key-words.php$ http://domainaddress.pl/ break;
} location / {
if ($http_host ~ "^www.domainaddress.pl"){
rewrite ^(.*)$ http://domainaddress.pl/$1 permanent;
} rewrite ^/key-words.php$ http://domainaddress.pl/ permanent;
} }0 -
How do I check that domain I'm considering buying has clean history?
I'm weighing up buying a niche-related 13-year-old domain that hasn't expired but hasn't been used in some time. I've read the very informative thread here: www.seomoz.org/q/buying-domains-with-prior-age-and-or-pr The backlink profile is clean, with only on-topic links. However, it doesn't rank in the top 50 positions for its own (hyphenated & fairly competitive) domain name. Does this indicate a Google penalty of some kind? What's the surefire way of checking?
Technical SEO | | Jeepster0 -
How different should content be so that it is not considered duplicate?
I am making a 2nd website for the same company. The name of the company, our services, keywords and contact info will show up several times within the text of both websites. The overall text and paragraphs will be different but some info may be repeated on both sites. Should I continue this? What precautions should I take?
Technical SEO | | savva0 -
Would these be considered dynamic URLs?
Hi, I have a (brand) new client (outdoor recreation), and it links to many different lodges. It's built in Wordpress (Pagelines), and the partner page link URLs. Although they do have the "?" in there, it's only has a single parameter. http://www.clientsite/?partners=partner-name Google is indexing the URLs, I do plan to increase the amount of content/on-page for each. Yet, weighing the risk/reward of rewriting all of these URLs.
Technical SEO | | csmithal0 -
Is buying a domain with a high PR and redirecting it to your site considered black hat?
I want to buy a domain that has clean backlinks and then redirect it to my new domain to bump up my PR. Is this considered a black hat technique? Thanks Carla
Technical SEO | | Carla_Dawson1 -
Permanent 301 redirects vs canonical urls?
Im moving a website that was .php to wordpress with a few static HTML pages. Which is better use permanent 301 redirects and delte the old pages, leave the old pages and use canonical urls and 301 redirects or something else?
Technical SEO | | senith0