LiteSpeed enabled server vs Apache + LiteSpeed plugin + QUIC.cloud

[gregamer]

Hi,

I'm new to Litespeed and while testing it out I came to conclusion there are (generally) 2 options of using it:
1. Litespeed enabled server + Litespeed plugin (e.g. Wordpress)
2. no Litespeed on server + Litespeed plugin + QUIC.cloud (also Wordpress)

As far as my understanding goes the final result of both scenarios should be the same - minifying, combining and caching. Is that correct? If so, what is the difference between the two and how would one decide to go with option 1 or option 2? What are the advantages of having a Litespeed enabled server?

Thank you,
Grega

 

[Unique_Eric]

Hi Grega,

For Quic.Cloud services, it will apply different free quotas. For example,
Account with Apache + WP + LSCache + Quic.Cloud will apply free 1GB CDN traffic per month.
Account with LSWS + WP + LSCache + Quic.Cloud will apply free 10GB CDN traffic per month. Since LiteSpeed supports http3, you can turn on the "Enable QUIC Backend" feature too.
Check https://quic.cloud/cost/ for more information.

 

[gregamer]

Hi,

thanks for quick reply. I've been away for the past few days, so here are my thoughts:
besides the different quotas and http3, is the below equation valid performance wise (minification, aggregation, cache):
Apache + WP + LSCache + Quic.Cloud = LSWS + WP + LSCache

If the equation passes my conclusion would be for sites with low traffic the Apache with Quic.Cloud would do just fine while for larger sites with more traffic a LSWS would be suggested. I'm talking sites for local audience where CDN is not needed.

However using Quic.Cloud I see the TTFB and download times increase by about 20-30%. This is probably due to my server being closer than the cloud one.

Cheers,
Grega