Search results

Yes, current rewrite engine implement is like that. We will change our implementation to improve the compatibility with Apache. Thanks for the bug report and analysis.

LSWS does not work well with password protected SSL keys, please remove the key encryption with command openssl rsa -in forum.key -out forum_no_encrypt.key

We could not integrate GeoIP with LSWS before because it is GPL licensed. Just found that they changed to LGPL license on the C Library, so we can go ahead with the integration, should be available in 3.0 release. :)

You should remove the "Example" vhost along with the "Default" listener on port 80, everything should be configured though Apache's httpd.conf.

Please check lsws/logs/error.log, it should tell you which file is not found.

You can set "Apache Configuration File" to "/usr/local/apache/conf/httpd.conf" http://www.litespeedtech.com/docs/webserver/config/general/#apacheConfFile and "Apache port offset" to something like "1" or "2", restart server, you should be able to access your Apache sites at port "81" or "82"...

LSWS has anti-DoS feature already and it is better implemented than Apache's mod_evasive, mod_security equivalent is under development.

Never compared this two, from our past experiences, FreeBSD and Linux has similar performance with LiteSpeed.

That's the firewall on the server side, depends on what kind of iptables management software is used, you may found iptable rules in /etc/sysconfig/iptables, just add a similar line for port 7080 like that of port 80. then do "service iptables restart", if /etc/sysconfig/iptables is not there...

I think port 7080 is blocked by firewall.

"ps -ef | grep httpd" or check /usr/local/apache/conf/httpd.conf, it is nobody, you don't need to do anything, otherwise, remove the lsws directory, run install.sh again. If you want to manage your sites through Cpanel, it is the way to go. There are two ports you need to specify during...

When you install LiteSpeed, make sure you let LiteSpeed run as the same user as that of Apache. Then use our "Use Apache Configuration feature" http://www.litespeedtech.com/docs/webserver/config/general/#loadApacheConf You can use the "port offset" to try LiteSpeed along side with Apache, make...

You need to your own lsphp5 executable for PHP5 by following our Wiki, then add an external app for lsphp5 and script handler configuration for '*.php5' files at server level. Just duplicate our existing configuration for lsphp and 'php' script handler. All virutal hosts configured through...

mod_security equivalent is under development, will be available in 3.0 release. You can try LiteSpeed now without interrupt Apache service if you want to, either run LiteSpeed on different port with "Port offset" configuration, or on a different IP with "IP offset" configuration. If there is...

Thanks! Yes, we are running some Google Ads on some sites. However, it is strange that Gmail is not on the list. It is not a bad thing anyway. ;)

LSWS + LSAPI should be faster than mongrel cluster on each node for rails request along, and pages cached in file system can be served by LSWS directly. And you don't need to worry about monitoring each Mongrel instance. That's true that LSWS is feature rich, seems overkill for this purpose, but...

I perfer LSWS (Load balancer) + LSWS with LSAPI on each cluster node over litespeed + mongrel culster, configuration is a little easier and performance should be better as well. :)

Yes, you can configure Apache with it reverse-proxy feature to forward everything to LiteSpeed on that domain. It is pretty easy to do, please consult Apache's manual. However, it is not a optimal solution and you will get much less benefit than using LiteSpeed directly. With LiteSpeed's...

That's fine. If you rails application is mounted at URI '/', URI '/admin' probably does not work if you just add it as "Rails" context, you need to add a "static" context with URI "/admin", add access rules, "ErrorDocument 404 /dispatch.lsapi" in "Apache style configruation". Anyway, if...

You can safely ignore them since Rails are invoked by 404 handler. We will address this issue in next release.