1.5 File System Cache Speed Test

[the.rampage.rado]

Hi people!

 

Could you do the following test?

 

Enable File system Cache under Performance and tell if there's improvment in loading times. Use Google page speed insights (Critical Path Explorer) and other loading meters.

 

Also does anybody knows what the number under those settings mean?

 

 

I'm on shared hosting which means I can't use Memcached or APC or Xcache so I have to speed my site and obviously this is the only option left.

 

Could you do those benchmarks on your test distributions?

 

Best regards

[Trip]

The system CacheFS should be used only when the infrastructure contain only one front-end server. Ask your hosting company if you don't know.

... I think that it is quite clear that it it not for a shared hosting. In fact the last time I tested it - it created (hundret-)thousands of files and it took a long time to delete them so asking people enabling it for your benchmarks is a at least an unwise call because others might have to clean up the mess. I must say I tested it years ago but the one experience was enough. Maybe today it works better but anyway how should other people benchmark help you if they are running their installations on totally different machines?

I recommend http://www.webpagetest.org/ ... when your first byte time is to high you need another hosting. I the static files are taking to long maybe a cdn or other optimisations can help.

 

All the best, trip

[the.rampage.rado]

On shared hosting the server is only one. They use multiple hosting accounts on one server - sharing.

 

I saw where the caching is done and the cache files are far fewer and smaller than the smarty ones.

 

Could someone from Presta advise is it good to use it if we have no other option.

 

For me it gives ~ 30% improvment in loading times (from 2-3 sec to 1.x-2.3 seconds)

[Trip]

So I tested it and I see no significant difference. If you have a busy database it might increase speed. If you have a slow disk it might have negative effects. As I said I have now about 4000 files more in my cachefs folder. Luckily I can delete them via SSH. Via FTP it would take it's time .. Afaik a rule of thumb is avoid disk i/o if possible. As long you are happy with the results there is nothing against that. It might even be that a linux server caches often requested files to ram?! Not sure about that. In general it is not desirable to have much disk i/o as it pulls down the overall performance. For example when many files are backed upped or there is lots of disk access for other purpose your site performance can degrade dramatically. Simply spoken MySQL has a query cache and Memcached is running 100% in RAM to avoid extensive disk usage. Under circumstances it might make sense to use cachfs on a tmpfs or for the ones from the amiga era. Ram-Disk ... you have to look what exaclty takes the long times but when you are talking here about 1-3 secondes load time I simply do not undestand your problem?