| Author |
|
C0nw0nk
Joined: 07 Oct 2013
Posts: 241
Location: United Kingdom, London
|
 Posted: Sat 07 Jun '14 20:03 Post subject: |
 |
|
This is my 64bit (Default) Config from the install using the recommended settings.
http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=YhQbZeNK
Mod note: do not post your long config files here! |
|
| Back to top |
|
gijs
Joined: 27 Apr 2012
Posts: 189
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sun 08 Jun '14 22:19 Post subject: |
|
|
| C0nw0nk wrote: | Thanks ng4win looking forward to the results.
I can share my mysql config if you like.
I always was curious why my site seems so slow but yet php, apache, nginx was all delievering as soon as the request to the server was sent. The bottle neck of my applications turned out to be a 32bit mysql server.
I downloaded the mysql installer http://dev.mysql.com/downloads/installer/5.6.html
And set it up for a dedicated machine without any of the development components (All production) and it flys like a bullet now, So for anyone else who uses 32bit mysql in a 64bit enviorment i recommend you make a switch. (You will have to setup databases and phpmyadmin etc yourself but it is worth it, Something anyone serious about hosting or running a decent website should do.) |
Hmm, interesting I run 64 bit mysql as well.
I wonder if there is a performance difference between dedicated mysql and the shared server setting.
My server is set as shared but there is plenty of capacity left.
I checked your config and found that when I add: table_cache=8192
the server no longer starts, it appears this is a value only valid for mysql 5.1.2 and older.
I have mine tuned as well, and Joomla pages load in 1-2 seconds, but if I turn joomla cache plugin on then the load takes <1 sec.
The only bit of gain I can make I think is by switching to nginx, because of SPDY protocol for people with slower connections and because I think it has a faster time to first byte compared to Apache. |
|
| Back to top |
|
C0nw0nk
Joined: 07 Oct 2013
Posts: 241
Location: United Kingdom, London
|
| Posted: Mon 09 Jun '14 4:33 Post subject: |
|
|
| gijs wrote: |
I checked your config and found that when I add: table_cache=8192
the server no longer starts, it appears this is a value only valid for mysql 5.1.2 and older.
I have mine tuned as well, and Joomla pages load in 1-2 seconds, but if I turn joomla cache plugin on then the load takes <1 sec. |
My server is a mysql 5.6 server but the old 32bit server was a different version of mysql i checked the version and it is MySql -5.5.29.
Also since you are a Joomla user like myself check out a amazing caching extension called JotCache to increase page load speeds even more. I am currently talking to and setting something up with the developer so that his extension will work even better on wincache with the user cache. (Currently their extension only works with the file cache)
http://extensions.joomla.org/extensions/core-enhancements/performance/cache/13155
It is a top rated extension and is free. Aswell as in the Joomla global configuration for better caching performance make sure you set it to "Conservative Cache". It is like saving a screenshot/output of the html of the web page when it is loaded and delievering that to the guest/users making the site even faster. Prevents allot of uneeded mysql quries and will recache the page every 10-15 mins depending on what time you choose for a recache to run. |
|
| Back to top |
|
gijs
Joined: 27 Apr 2012
Posts: 189
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon 09 Jun '14 13:40 Post subject: |
|
|
So jotcache is faster than the caching in Joomla?
I'm using progressive filecaching incombination with the caching of PHP which is included with PHP 5.5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
C0nw0nk
Joined: 07 Oct 2013
Posts: 241
Location: United Kingdom, London
|
| Posted: Mon 09 Jun '14 14:17 Post subject: |
|
|
It is faster because it caches the page and modules, Joomla's built in cache will take modules but not content on the page like articles (third party extensions and pages). It struggles with dynamic content.
Differnce Between Progressive & Conservative Caching :
Progressive - Caches the content for each unique user. Overrides all module caching settings.
Conservative - Shows the same cached content to all users. Obeys the modules caching settings.
Module Caching - A setting inside of each module that allows you to make it cached or not.
Types Of Joomla Cache :
Joomla 'System - Cache' core plugin- Caches each whole page of your site. You can also enable browser caching on your vistors browsers.
Joomla Global Configuration -> Cache settings - Handles componant views, url and parameters. Module caching (controlled by individual module).
JotCache - An extension that works similar to 'System - Cache' plugin, but has more features.
Regardless of conservative vs. progressive caching, logged in users do not see cached module content, When logged in you will be served live content as it changes (Dyanmic).
JotCache picks up on all third party extensions and modules and everything that the default Joomla Cache misses.
Conservative cache is the best to use and set it to like 10 or 15mins and use JotCache and you will be shocked at speeds. (On all pages)
I will also add if you use Jotcache disable the "System Cache" plugin from Joomla they are incompatible and it will cause problems and slow the site down. |
|
| Back to top |
|
gijs
Joined: 27 Apr 2012
Posts: 189
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon 09 Jun '14 14:37 Post subject: |
|
|
| I've installed it, its just about as fast as before when I had progressive caching with system caching plugin enabled. |
|
| Back to top |
|
C0nw0nk
Joined: 07 Oct 2013
Posts: 241
Location: United Kingdom, London
|
| Posted: Mon 09 Jun '14 14:49 Post subject: |
|
|
| Suppose should realy benchmark to see what one is faster. From my tests i find JotCache faster but i use allot of thirdparty extensions and modules like Kunena forum etc. So for me JotCache is better. |
|
| Back to top |
|
gijs
Joined: 27 Apr 2012
Posts: 189
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon 09 Jun '14 14:53 Post subject: |
|
|
It's hard to benchmark with sites such as webpagetest.org
Only real way is to locally create lots of connections and see which one can handle more connections I guess. |
|
| Back to top |
|
C0nw0nk
Joined: 07 Oct 2013
Posts: 241
Location: United Kingdom, London
|
| Posted: Mon 09 Jun '14 14:57 Post subject: |
|
|
You should change from Progressive to Conservative in my opinion better to serve all guest users the same content rather than all different and if it is a new guest it will be grabbing a fresh (live version of the page) for the first connection.
I am a bit overkill with my setup because i cache everything, I even have Nginx caching 404 errors etc (Microcache as it is called).
Also Ng4win your nginx comes with the following module.
https://github.com/bigplum/Nginx-limit-traffic-rate-module
Isit better to use that to limit traffic instead of http://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_core_module.html#limit_rate |
|
| Back to top |
|
ng4win
Joined: 25 May 2014
Posts: 78
|
| Posted: Mon 09 Jun '14 17:57 Post subject: |
|
|
They both work but limit rate is more used to stop flooding. |
|
| Back to top |
|
C0nw0nk
Joined: 07 Oct 2013
Posts: 241
Location: United Kingdom, London
|
| Posted: Mon 09 Jun '14 19:08 Post subject: |
|
|
| Is there a performance impact on using nginx.exe compared to using nginx_basic.exe ? The only difference i see is one contains addons the other does not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
gijs
Joined: 27 Apr 2012
Posts: 189
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon 09 Jun '14 21:55 Post subject: |
|
|
| Didn't basic lack spdy? |
|
| Back to top |
|
ng4win
Joined: 25 May 2014
Posts: 78
|
| Posted: Mon 09 Jun '14 22:09 Post subject: |
|
|
| C0nw0nk wrote: | | Is there a performance impact on using nginx.exe compared to using nginx_basic.exe ? The only difference i see is one contains addons the other does not. |
Maybe 0.25% because each request has to go through each eventloop handler of each add-on.
| gijs wrote: | | Didn't basic lack spdy? |
Nope, see the feature list, (* nginx_basic only) and see nginx -V. |
|
| Back to top |
|
C0nw0nk
Joined: 07 Oct 2013
Posts: 241
Location: United Kingdom, London
|
| Posted: Thu 12 Jun '14 1:14 Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks ng4win also gijs in my opinion after I had a massive traffic influx nginx on one of my servers started lagging out, Turns out the jotcache file cache was making so many read and writes it was using up so much cpu of my server, So to fix it I disabled jotcache re-enabled default joomla cache with conservative caching, Now everything runs even smoother with all pages and things being saved to the windows user cache. (Speeds are the same).
But I am outputting over 2GBPS so it does not supprise me. I also experienced some MyIsam table crashes to MySQL with the massive increase in traffic to fix that I converted all tables that crashed to InnoDB after repairing them.
Also can someone tell me a way to generate a ssl certificate on windows to setup with nginx since i google it but only find ways to buy it and using IIS web server etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
jraute
Joined: 13 Sep 2013
Posts: 188
Location: Rheinland, Germany
|
| Posted: Thu 12 Jun '14 9:23 Post subject: |
|
|
| C0nw0nk wrote: |
Also can someone tell me a way to generate a ssl certificate on windows to setup with nginx since i google it but only find ways to buy it and using IIS web server etc. |
http://www.apachelounge.com/viewtopic.php?t=5786 |
|
| Back to top |
|
gijs
Joined: 27 Apr 2012
Posts: 189
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu 12 Jun '14 13:35 Post subject: |
|
|
@C0nw0nk
I've installed jotcache as well, didn't notice any performance improvement.
Make sure to go to plugins and enable the system - cache plugin, speeds up Joomla a great deal! |
|
| Back to top |
|
C0nw0nk
Joined: 07 Oct 2013
Posts: 241
Location: United Kingdom, London
|
| Posted: Thu 12 Jun '14 19:57 Post subject: |
|
|
| gijs wrote: | @C0nw0nk
I've installed jotcache as well, didn't notice any performance improvement.
Make sure to go to plugins and enable the system - cache plugin, speeds up Joomla a great deal! |
Yeah I did I have used it before it is the same as jotcache just without the advanced manager, But Joomla Cache plugin is allot better than Jotcache since it does not lag the server out due to the file read and writes it keeps making, As well as Joomla cache actualy works and functions with wincache unlike JotCache.
Now to correct my post earlier even though JotCache is faster than Joomla Cache plugin by a few mili seconds, It is better to use the Joomla Cache Plugin because it is compatible with wincache, For a extremely high traffic site you need something that does not use allot of cpu and lag out your machines like JotCache does, If JotCache worked with WinCache they would be the better than Joomla's Cache plugin.
And thanks Jraute will be testing it out later  |
|
| Back to top |
|
C0nw0nk
Joined: 07 Oct 2013
Posts: 241
Location: United Kingdom, London
|
| Posted: Fri 13 Jun '14 19:20 Post subject: |
|
|
Also ng4win would you know how to build a feature into your nginx like youtube has, When a video is playing if you click pause it also stops downloading / transmitting the file to the user.
Example : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iC685EyVto&t=0m33s While it is playing you see the grey download bar if you was to pause media it stops the download of the file. (Saving bandwidth)
I think it is a brilliant idea because if for what ever reason a file download is paused or waiting on a response from the user it stops using up the servers bandwidth.
I suppose the correct term for it is throttling, Like IIS does. http://www.iis.net/learn/media/bit-rate-throttling/bit-rate-throttling-configuration-walkthrough
Last edited by C0nw0nk on Fri 13 Jun '14 21:56; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
ng4win
Joined: 25 May 2014
Posts: 78
|
|
| Back to top |
|
C0nw0nk
Joined: 07 Oct 2013
Posts: 241
Location: United Kingdom, London
|
| Posted: Fri 13 Jun '14 20:38 Post subject: |
|
|
| So if i was to pause a video stream/download, with those modules would it keep downloading or stop ? Just like youtube does it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
