The PNG link i gave kim0 was just an example of an image. Currently we are
caching all general type of images (gif, jpg, png).
As Ahmed pointed, current version of Moin isn't still html friendly,
hopefully this will be addressed at Moin 1.6.x (our current version is Moin
1.3.4 and our testing was based on Moin 1.5.6).
Moin 1.5.6, still bring alot of improvements, so in my opinion, even though
that Moin html is not cache friendly we should still be thinking in the
migration. Also as a workaround, we can still create a static website that
with the help of mod_headers, it could be forced to be cached.
Last but not least, let's not forget that this was a local test. A more real
stress test, is still going to be prepared and should include a server
requesting to the future architecture (including load balancer and both
proxies), this will improve even more our ability to deliver the desired
We would like some coments on this tests (past and future), so that we can
improve what needs to be improved. As a final note, i would like all of you
to start testing the future platform. Just play with Moin, and give some
feedback on the WikiMigration page.
Once again thanks all for the help and feedback...
On 12/23/06, Ahmed Kamal <email.ahmedkamal(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
Paulo and me (kim0) have been working on testing a caching setup for the
wiki. A test migration to Moin 1.5 is complete, squid is now configured as
a reverse caching proxy. We've done some stress tests on the current setup.
Attached are some extracted results that (I think) are of interest. Mainly
the number of requests served per second, and the average time for serving a
request. Also, paulo pointed that caching differs per file type, the tests
have been done on three different file types (html, png image, and css)
1- All connections were initiated from proxy1
2- Proxy2 had squid caching turned on
3- Testing for html/png/css done, sweeping the number of concurrent
4- Turn off squid caching on proxy2
5- Testing for html/png/css done, sweeping the number of concurrent
1- Serving PNG is 10X faster than html
2- Serving CSS is 10X faster than PNG!
3- Serving html is really the bottleneck. Unfortunately, Moin developers
acknowledged current version ( 1.5) is not cache friendly. Work for making
1.6 cache friendly is undergoing
4- Using squid currently only seems to double our PNG serving rate,
5- The application server hits swapping (about 0.5GB) at full load (~300
concurrent connections), for some reason the requests/second served is still
high!! (Is our cache disks that fast)
6- The test did not stress the server bad enough to run out of swap space,
not sure if this is needed though!
I can send the full results date if anyone is interested.
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list