About:
LiteSpeed Web Server is a high-performance, secure, easy-to-use, and Apache interchangeable Web server. It supports HTTP/1.1, SSL, CGI, FastCGI, LSAPI, PHP, JSP, Servlets, GZIP compression, chroot, IP level throttling, connection accounting, DoS attack prevention, and instant recovery mechanisms. With its Apache compatible rewrite engine, .htaccess, and MS FrontPage support, migration is quick and easy. A Web interface is included for administration and configuration. It can be used as a content accelerator, compression proxy, or a security guard running in front of any Web and application server.

Release focus: Major feature enhancements

Changes:
LiteSpeed API, the fastest server API for LiteSpeed Web server, has been implemented. PHP LiteSpeed SAPI has been implemented with enhanced PHP performance (30% over FastCGI PHP and 100% over Apache mod_php), as well as flexible PHP configuration overridden via .htaccess files, a stateless external application load balancer, and improvements to the external application manager to deal with non-responding external applications.

Author:
LiteSpeed Technologies [contact developer]

Rating:	reset 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
8.56/10.00 (10 votes)

Homepage:
http://litespeedtech.com
Tar/GZ:
http://litespeedtech.com/download.html

Trove categories: [change]

[Development Status]		6 - Mature
[License]		Freeware, Other/Proprietary License with Free Trial
[Operating System]		MacOS X, POSIX :: BSD :: FreeBSD, POSIX :: Linux, POSIX :: SunOS/Solaris, Unix
[Programming Language]		C++, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby
[Topic]		Internet :: Proxy Servers, Internet :: WWW/HTTP :: HTTP Servers

Dependencies: [change]
No dependencies filed

 Branches

Branch	Version	Last release	License	URLs
Standard	3.3	20-Nov-2007	Freeware
Development	2.1RC3	31-Aug-2005	Freeware
Enterprise	2.2	25-Aug-2006	Other/Proprietary License with Free Trial
Professional	1.5 Pro	28-Jun-2004	Other/Proprietary License with Free Trial

 Releases

Version	Focus	Date
2.1RC3	Major feature enhancements	31-Aug-2005 21:15
2.1RC2	Major feature enhancements	26-Jul-2005 06:34
2.1RC1	Major feature enhancements	16-May-2005 20:47
2.0RC3	Major feature enhancements	03-Nov-2004 16:49
2.0RC2	Major feature enhancements	21-Sep-2004 19:30
2.0RC1	Major feature enhancements	23-Aug-2004 17:39
1.5RC4	Major feature enhancements	03-Jun-2004 20:24
1.5RC3	Major feature enhancements	25-May-2004 03:32
1.5RC2	Major feature enhancements	28-Apr-2004 16:57
1.5RC1	Major feature enhancements	20-Apr-2004 18:44

 Comments

[»] chroot
by phr3ak - Sep 27th 2007 11:07:26

chroot is really working?

[reply] [top]

[»] Dmg
by Jpn - Mar 7th 2006 01:16:53

where's the .Dmg for Mac OSX?

[reply] [top]

[»] Great Job
by johnnymason - May 16th 2005 14:41:47

Excellent results so far. Looking forward to future improvements!

--
Free Ringtones

[reply] [top]

[»] one of the best servers out there!
by Mario Micklisch - Aug 23rd 2004 09:32:33

using it now for more than a year and deploying it on more servers :)

switched from apache to it and not only the administration is foolproof .. it's really more robust & much faster than apache and most of the other webserver-projects :-)

[reply] [top]

[»] Great webserver
by eisman - Aug 14th 2004 01:31:24

This is a great webserver, I liked it so much that I wrote a
review/howto on it.

It is easy in use, easy to handle and fast.

--
Greetings, S. R. Eissens

[reply] [top]

[»] Updated Benchmark vs. Apache and TUX
by LiteSpeed Technologies - Jul 15th 2003 10:47:48

Please see our updated benchmark page http://litespeedtech.com/benchmark.html. New benchmark includes throttling, LiteSpeed Pro vs. TUX with faster CPU.

--
LiteSpeed Web Server Faster, Easier and Safer!

[reply] [top]

[»] License of "Freeware" isn't very free
by Nevyn - Jul 9th 2003 13:16:24

IMO it'd be better for the project to remove the "Freeware" moniker on the license and just stick with "Other/Proprietary License with Free Trial" given that you can't get the source.

[reply] [top]

[»] Re: License of "Freeware" isn't very free
by LiteSpeed Technologies - Jul 9th 2003 13:53:52

Freeware does not mean the source code has to be published, we did not claim it is G(L)PL or BSD license. There are planty Freeware projects published on freshmeat.net do not publish their source code. We do not see any problem with our license claim as our Standard Edition is absolutely FREE for any purposes of use, even commercial.

--
LiteSpeed Web Server Faster, Easier and Safer!

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: License of "Freeware" isn't very free
by LiteSpeed Technologies - Jul 15th 2003 11:33:13

Our goal is to provide an easy to use, secure and high performance web server product with the best value for all level of users instead of a so so open source project. Close source is easier for us to maintain the quality, performance and security.
However, we do consider releasing some libraries, like our lightweight STL replacement, under LGPL or BSD license in the near further. If you really want to help, please help us test the web server.
Thank you for showing your interest in our product and sorry if you feel that you had been allured by the “Freeware” license.


--
LiteSpeed Web Server Faster, Easier and Safer!

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: License of "Freeware" isn't very free
by Greg A. Woods - May 2nd 2007 22:00:29

I also really dislike the idea of binary-only BLOBs being labeled as "freeware" on Freshmeat. It definitely goes against the spirit of anything I would expect to find labeled as "freeware". I expect freeware to have source available.


> Our goal is to provide an easy to use,
> secure and high performance web server
> product with the best value for all
> level of users instead of a so so open
> source project. Close source is easier
> for us to maintain the quality,
> performance and security.

That sounds like a pile of VERY poor excuses.

Closed source software is NOT actually easier to maintain, and in fact it's likely going to be of much lower quality and performance, and have less security too, than if you published your source code.

You simply cannot hope to attain the highest levels of quality, performance, and security without having far more eyes than just your own looking at your code.

Note that just because your code is open sourced doesn't mean you have to accept changes back or even allow for redistribution, and you can definitely restrict redistribution of modified copies (though that's beginning to go against the spirit of open source). I.e. you don't have to follow common open source development practices just because you publish your source code for everyone to examine, fix, change, and build for themselves.

I for one would never ever have looked at your product in the first place if I had known the source was unavailable.

--
Greg A. Woods

[reply] [top]

---