Likelihood to Recommend
[NGINX] is very well suited for high performance. I have seen it used on servers with 1k current connections with no issues. Despite seeing it used in many environments I've never seen software developers use it over apache, express, IIS in local dev environments so it may be more difficult to setup. I've also seen it used to load balance again without issues.
Read full review
It fits perfectly for SOA and EAI architecture with large numbers of services that required to be wired to each other, the binding virtualization is quite good to simply this part. For the simple scenario of orchestration and /or ESB architecture could be a better use traditional stack.
Read full review Pros Very low memory usage. Can handle many more connections than alternatives (like Apache HTTPD) due to low overhead. (event-based architecture). Great at serving static content. Scales very well. Easy to host multiple Nginx servers to promote high availability. Open-Source (no cost)! Read full review reduce the number of http port required by services simplified the binding connection amongst services high scalability and fast deployment of applications Read full review Cons Customer support can be strangely condescending, perhaps it's a language issue? I find it a little weird how the release versions used for Nginx+ aren't the same as for open source version. It can be very confusing to determine the cross-compatibility of modules, etc., because of this. It seems like some (most?) modules on their own site are ancient and no longer supported, so their documentation in this area needs work. It's difficult to navigate between nginx.com commercial site and customer support. They need to be integrated together. I'd love to see more work done on nginx+ monitoring without requiring logging every request. I understand that many statistics can only be derived from logs, but plenty should work without that. Logging is not an option in many environments. Read full review health check of services and application features has been released with a lot of bugs that have never been fixed it is not so simple to apply the security policy to service/reference binding Read full review Usability Front end proxy and reverse proxy of Nginx is always useful. I always prefer to Nginx in overall usability when you have application server and database or multiple application servers and single database i.e. clustered application. Nginx provides really good features and flexibility which helps the system administrator in case of troubleshooting and also . Also, Nginx doesn't delay any request because of internal performance issues. from the administration perspective Read full review Support Rating John Reeve
Principal, Lead developer, Lead designer
Read full review Alternatives Considered
We have used Traffic, Apache, Google Cloud Load Balancing and other managed cloud-based load balancers. When it comes to scale and customization nothing beats Nginx. We selected Nginx over the others because
we have a large number of services and we can manage a single Nginx instance for all of them we have high impact services and Nginx never breaks a sweat under load individual services have special considerations and Nginx lets us configure each one uniquely Read full review
TIBCO service grid has been chosen as a natural selection of the TIBCO product evolution. The high flexibility and the binding virtualization fits very well with client needs for its EAI applications due to the huge number of services and applications, the management of application dependencies during deployment, the advantage of perfect integration with EMS for logging
Read full review Return on Investment Nginx has decreased the burden of web server administration and maintenance, and we are spending less time on server issues than when we were using Apache. Nginx has allowed more people in our company to get involved with configuring things on the web server, so there's no longer a single point of failure ("the Apache guy"). Nginx has given us the ability to handle a larger number of requests without scaling up in hardware quite so quickly. Read full review The integration of old BW with BWSE and its interface quite similar to design time has reduced the cost of training for developers The TIBCO support for this product is no the best and clients complains too much about this. This required to find a workaround or force the client to move to new/or different product. Huge impact on ROI Read full review ScreenShots