- Moderated by:
- Support Team
0.8 MS3 Benchmarkhh
-
- rank:
-
Professional
- registered:
- September 2002
- Status:
- offline
- last visit:
- 19.11.08
- Posts:
- 879
Check out the latest SVN version. Jörn and Mark put some time into optimizing performance. If you use the "blank" module you have Lobos suggested "hello world" module
As far as I understood Jörn, there's no unnecessary SQL call for such a basic call.
--
best regards from Kiel, sailing city
Steffen Voss
Member of the PostNuke Steering Committee
Read The Zikulan's Blog
-
- rank:
-
Helper
- registered:
- July 2002
- Status:
- offline
- last visit:
- 07.09.08
- Posts:
- 245
Lobos
Just wondering - if I create a module that simply outputs "hello world" and exit(); will there be routines run from the core that are not required to acheive this? ie render stuff (Smarty, theme), database stuff (adobe), etc, etc. Is PostNuke set up to only run what is required at the time?
I have just performed a performance review of a stripped down .8 SVN checkout - with no visible blocks and a "hello world" module as you suggest. As a result of this I was able to locate a few places where we could improve performance (which has been done and in SVN). So, as far as I'm able to debug and read the profiler output, there's no unnecessary overhead involved in displaying a simple page.
Mark has in addition to this implemented a singleton pattern for the pnRender/Smarty stuff. This has removed a lot of the performance issues from pnRender.
So, at the time of writing, we are not aware of any easy-to-spot bottlenecks in the core.
-
Anonymous
- rank:
- 1
- registered:
- March 2002
- Status:
- offline
- last visit:
- 01.05.06
- Posts:
- 0
JørnWildt
Mark has in addition to this implemented a singleton pattern for the pnRender/Smarty stuff. This has removed a lot of the performance issues from pnRender.
I have installed a test-site with the 25. June .8 snapshot together with a customized Pagesetter database to test pnRender and theme caching. pnRender caching works well, and theme caching has improved a lot - but with the following defect: manual entries in Pagesetter filter forms are cached, too. So once you have filtered for something, this filter and its results will always be returned and overwrite any new manual filter entry. Using [nocache] for the whole template did not resolve the issue. The same is true for check boxes in the core setup, e.g. after checking the theme-cache-checkbox you cannot uncheck it anymore. Only manual removing all cache-files from the server enabled me to uncheck it again.
-
- rank:
-
Professional
- registered:
- September 2006
- Status:
- online
- Posts:
- 1451
Comparing with a friend the PN0.8 SVN20071007 (almost RC2) with Joomla 1.5 RC3, here are the Benchmarks results.
Important Note:
This is over a desktop PC, nothing compared with a server hardware capabilities. Just Ubuntu 7.04 with xampp 1.6.4 (Apache/2.2.6 PHP/5.2.4)
PostNuke 0.8
pnRender & Theme cache enabled, template check disabled.
Not using sessions for unregistereds.
Code
root@se16:/opt/lampp# ab -t 10 -c 60 localhost/postnuke
This is ApacheBench, Version 2.0.40-dev <$Revision: 1.146 $> apache-2.0
Copyright 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, http://www.zeustech.net/
Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation, http://www.apache.org/
Benchmarking localhost (be patient)
Completed 5000 requests
Completed 10000 requests
Completed 15000 requests
Finished 16154 requests
Server Software: Apache/2.2.6
Server Hostname: localhost
Server Port: 80
Document Path: /postnuke
Document Length: 404 bytes
Concurrency Level: 60
time taken for tests: 10.1123 seconds
Complete requests: 16154
Failed requests: 0
Write errors: 0
Non-2xx responses: 16163
Total transferred: 11718175 bytes
HTML transferred: 6529852 bytes
Requests per second: 1615.22 [#/sec] (mean)
time per request: 37.147 [ms] (mean)
time per request: 0.619 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 1144.17 [Kbytes/sec] received
Connection Times (ms)
min mean[sd] median max
Connect: 0 2 2.0 2 26
Processing: 5 33 99.9 32 8701
Waiting: 4 31 99.8 29 8696
Total: 8 36 99.8 34 8701
Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
50% 34
66% 35
75% 35
80% 35
90% 35
95% 37
98% 42
99% 49
100% 8701 (longest request)
Joomla 1.5 RC3
Cache enabled (it seems that enabling the cache in Joomla is worst that have it disabled
, without cache complete 1807.98 requests per second)
Code
root@se16:/opt/lampp# ab -t 10 -c 60 localhost/joomla
This is ApacheBench, Version 2.0.40-dev <$Revision: 1.146 $> apache-2.0
Copyright 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, http://www.zeustech.net/
Copyright 2006 The Apache Software Foundation, http://www.apache.org/
Benchmarking localhost (be patient)
Completed 5000 requests
Completed 10000 requests
Completed 15000 requests
Finished 15479 requests
Server Software: Apache/2.2.6
Server Hostname: localhost
Server Port: 80
Document Path: /joomla
Document Length: 402 bytes
Concurrency Level: 60
time taken for tests: 10.408 seconds
Complete requests: 15479
Failed requests: 0
Write errors: 0
Non-2xx responses: 15486
Total transferred: 11165406 bytes
HTML transferred: 6225372 bytes
Requests per second: 1547.84 [#/sec] (mean)
time per request: 38.764 [ms] (mean)
time per request: 0.646 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 1090.26 [Kbytes/sec] received
Connection Times (ms)
min mean[sd] median max
Connect: 0 0 0.1 0 3
Processing: 5 33 23.5 35 1423
Waiting: 5 32 4.8 35 345
Total: 7 33 23.5 35 1423
Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
50% 35
66% 36
75% 36
80% 36
90% 36
95% 37
98% 40
99% 45
100% 1423 (longest request)
Clean installations,
Andreas08 PN theme vs default Joomla theme,
PN: Who's online, Main Menu, Login block. Two News articles.
Joomla: Who's online, Main Menu, Login Form, Two News articles (mods, components, whatever!) all the rest disabled!
Obviously, i'm not a Joomla fan but my friend yes, and the results with the phisical order of PN, and the cache results, give him some reasons to think that PN is better.
Just to think a little, i'm happy with the pnRender performance, and with the cache design off course, i know that can be improved in a further, because with cache and without PN cache, the difference is minus than 100 request per second...
--
- Mateo T. -
Mis principios... son mis fines
-
- rank:
-
Freshman
- registered:
- December 1969
- Status:
- offline
- last visit:
- 17.10.07
- Posts:
- 2
-
- rank:
-
Professional
- registered:
- September 2003
- Status:
- offline
- last visit:
- 21.10.07
- Posts:
- 2423
Quote
Failed requests: 0
..this pleases me so :) .. it's probably time I grab a copy, brew some coffee and tool around.
thanks fellers.. truly appreciate the efforts.
Edit:
Quote
Requests per second: 1615.22
Seems a little high.. I don't even get those results with a static HTML file
edited by: InvalidResponse, Nov 28, 2007 - 01:37 PM
--
http://www.invalidresponse.com
|
