Re: [PHP] high traffic websites
it may be helpful for someone. I liked GTmetrix kinda helpful and magic. http://gtmetrix.com/#! Sincerely Negin Nickparsa On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Sebastian Krebs krebs@gmail.comwrote: 2013/9/18 Camilo Sperberg unrea...@gmail.com On Sep 18, 2013, at 14:26, Haluk Karamete halukkaram...@gmail.com wrote: I recommend OPCache, which is already included in PHP 5.5. Camilo, I'm just curious about the disadvantageous aspects of OPcache. My logic says there must be some issues with it otherwise it would have come already enabled. Sent from iPhone On Sep 18, 2013, at 2:20 AM, Camilo Sperberg unrea...@gmail.com wrote: On Sep 18, 2013, at 09:38, Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you Sebastian..actually I will already have one if qualified for the job. Yes, and I may fail to handle it that's why I asked for guidance. I wanted some tidbits to start over. I have searched through yslow, HTTtrack and others. I have searched through php list in my email too before asking this question. it is kind of beneficial for all people and not has been asked directly. Sincerely Negin Nickparsa On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Sebastian Krebs krebs@gmail.com wrote: 2013/9/18 Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com In general, what are the best ways to handle high traffic websites? VPS(clouds)? web analyzers? dedicated servers? distributed memory cache? Yes :) But seriously: That is a topic most of us spent much time to get into it. You can explain it with a bunch of buzzwords. Additional, how do you define high traffic websites? Do you already _have_ such a site? Or do you _want_ it? It's important, because I've seen it far too often, that projects spent too much effort in their high traffic infrastructure and at the end it wasn't that high traffic ;) I wont say, that you cannot be successfull, but you should start with an effort you can handle. Regards, Sebastian Sincerely Negin Nickparsa -- github.com/KingCrunch Your question is way too vague to be answered properly... My best guess would be that it depends severely on the type of website you have and how's the current implementation being well... implemented. Simply said: what works for Facebook may/will not work for linkedIn, twitter or Google, mainly because the type of search differs A LOT: facebook is about relations between people, twitter is about small pieces of data not mainly interconnected between each other, while Google is all about links and all type of content: from little pieces of information through whole Wikipedia. You could start by studying how varnish and redis/memcached works, you could study about how proxies work (nginx et al), CDNs and that kind of stuff, but if you want more specific answers, you could better ask specific question. In the PHP area, an opcode cache does the job very well and can accelerate the page load by several orders of magnitude, I recommend OPCache, which is already included in PHP 5.5. Greetings. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php The original RFC states: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/optimizerplus The integration proposed for PHP 5.5.0 is mostly 'soft' integration. That means that there'll be no tight coupling between Optimizer+ and PHP; Those who wish to use another opcode cache will be able to do so, by not loading Optimizer+ and loading another opcode cache instead. As per the Suggested Roadmap above, we might want to review this decision in the future; There might be room for further performance or functionality gains from tighter integration; None are known at this point, and they're beyond the scope of this RFC. So that's why OPCache isn't enabled by default in PHP 5.5 Also worth to mention, that it is the first release with an opcode-cache integrated. Giving the other some release to get used to it, sounds useful :) Greetings. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- github.com/KingCrunch
Re: [PHP] high traffic websites
2013/9/18 Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com In general, what are the best ways to handle high traffic websites? VPS(clouds)? web analyzers? dedicated servers? distributed memory cache? Yes :) But seriously: That is a topic most of us spent much time to get into it. You can explain it with a bunch of buzzwords. Additional, how do you define high traffic websites? Do you already _have_ such a site? Or do you _want_ it? It's important, because I've seen it far too often, that projects spent too much effort in their high traffic infrastructure and at the end it wasn't that high traffic ;) I wont say, that you cannot be successfull, but you should start with an effort you can handle. Regards, Sebastian Sincerely Negin Nickparsa -- github.com/KingCrunch
Re: [PHP] high traffic websites
Thank you Sebastian..actually I will already have one if qualified for the job. Yes, and I may fail to handle it that's why I asked for guidance. I wanted some tidbits to start over. I have searched through yslow, HTTtrack and others. I have searched through php list in my email too before asking this question. it is kind of beneficial for all people and not has been asked directly. Sincerely Negin Nickparsa On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Sebastian Krebs krebs@gmail.comwrote: 2013/9/18 Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com In general, what are the best ways to handle high traffic websites? VPS(clouds)? web analyzers? dedicated servers? distributed memory cache? Yes :) But seriously: That is a topic most of us spent much time to get into it. You can explain it with a bunch of buzzwords. Additional, how do you define high traffic websites? Do you already _have_ such a site? Or do you _want_ it? It's important, because I've seen it far too often, that projects spent too much effort in their high traffic infrastructure and at the end it wasn't that high traffic ;) I wont say, that you cannot be successfull, but you should start with an effort you can handle. Regards, Sebastian Sincerely Negin Nickparsa -- github.com/KingCrunch
Re: [PHP] high traffic websites
On Sep 18, 2013, at 09:38, Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you Sebastian..actually I will already have one if qualified for the job. Yes, and I may fail to handle it that's why I asked for guidance. I wanted some tidbits to start over. I have searched through yslow, HTTtrack and others. I have searched through php list in my email too before asking this question. it is kind of beneficial for all people and not has been asked directly. Sincerely Negin Nickparsa On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Sebastian Krebs krebs@gmail.comwrote: 2013/9/18 Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com In general, what are the best ways to handle high traffic websites? VPS(clouds)? web analyzers? dedicated servers? distributed memory cache? Yes :) But seriously: That is a topic most of us spent much time to get into it. You can explain it with a bunch of buzzwords. Additional, how do you define high traffic websites? Do you already _have_ such a site? Or do you _want_ it? It's important, because I've seen it far too often, that projects spent too much effort in their high traffic infrastructure and at the end it wasn't that high traffic ;) I wont say, that you cannot be successfull, but you should start with an effort you can handle. Regards, Sebastian Sincerely Negin Nickparsa -- github.com/KingCrunch Your question is way too vague to be answered properly... My best guess would be that it depends severely on the type of website you have and how's the current implementation being well... implemented. Simply said: what works for Facebook may/will not work for linkedIn, twitter or Google, mainly because the type of search differs A LOT: facebook is about relations between people, twitter is about small pieces of data not mainly interconnected between each other, while Google is all about links and all type of content: from little pieces of information through whole Wikipedia. You could start by studying how varnish and redis/memcached works, you could study about how proxies work (nginx et al), CDNs and that kind of stuff, but if you want more specific answers, you could better ask specific question. In the PHP area, an opcode cache does the job very well and can accelerate the page load by several orders of magnitude, I recommend OPCache, which is already included in PHP 5.5. Greetings. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] high traffic websites
Thank you Camilo to be more in details,suppose the website has 80,000 users and each page takes 200 ms to be rendered and you have thousand hits in a second so we want to reduce the time of rendering. is there any way to reduce the rendering time? other thing is suppose they want to upload files simultaneously and the videos are in the website not on another server like YouTube and so streams are really consuming the bandwidth. Also,It is troublesome to get backups,when getting backups you have problem of lock backing up with bulk of data. Sincerely Negin Nickparsa On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Camilo Sperberg unrea...@gmail.comwrote: On Sep 18, 2013, at 09:38, Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you Sebastian..actually I will already have one if qualified for the job. Yes, and I may fail to handle it that's why I asked for guidance. I wanted some tidbits to start over. I have searched through yslow, HTTtrack and others. I have searched through php list in my email too before asking this question. it is kind of beneficial for all people and not has been asked directly. Sincerely Negin Nickparsa On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Sebastian Krebs krebs@gmail.com wrote: 2013/9/18 Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com In general, what are the best ways to handle high traffic websites? VPS(clouds)? web analyzers? dedicated servers? distributed memory cache? Yes :) But seriously: That is a topic most of us spent much time to get into it. You can explain it with a bunch of buzzwords. Additional, how do you define high traffic websites? Do you already _have_ such a site? Or do you _want_ it? It's important, because I've seen it far too often, that projects spent too much effort in their high traffic infrastructure and at the end it wasn't that high traffic ;) I wont say, that you cannot be successfull, but you should start with an effort you can handle. Regards, Sebastian Sincerely Negin Nickparsa -- github.com/KingCrunch Your question is way too vague to be answered properly... My best guess would be that it depends severely on the type of website you have and how's the current implementation being well... implemented. Simply said: what works for Facebook may/will not work for linkedIn, twitter or Google, mainly because the type of search differs A LOT: facebook is about relations between people, twitter is about small pieces of data not mainly interconnected between each other, while Google is all about links and all type of content: from little pieces of information through whole Wikipedia. You could start by studying how varnish and redis/memcached works, you could study about how proxies work (nginx et al), CDNs and that kind of stuff, but if you want more specific answers, you could better ask specific question. In the PHP area, an opcode cache does the job very well and can accelerate the page load by several orders of magnitude, I recommend OPCache, which is already included in PHP 5.5. Greetings.
Re: [PHP] high traffic websites
2013/9/18 Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com Thank you Camilo to be more in details,suppose the website has 80,000 users and each page takes 200 ms to be rendered and you have thousand hits in a second so we want to reduce the time of rendering. is there any way to reduce the rendering time? Read about frontend-/proxy-caching (Nginx, Varnish) and ESI/SSI-include (also NGinx and Varnish ;)). The idea is simply If you don't have to process on every request in the backend, don't process it in the backend on every request. But maybe you mixed up some words, because the rendering time is the time consumed by the renderer within the browser (HTML and CSS). This you can improve, if you improve your HTML/CSS :) I am a little bit curious: Do you _really_ have 1000 requests/second, or do you just throw some numbers in? ;) other thing is suppose they want to upload files simultaneously and the videos are in the website not on another server like YouTube and so streams are really consuming the bandwidth. Well, if there are streams, there are streams. I cannot imagine, that there is another way someone can stream a video without downloading it. Also,It is troublesome to get backups,when getting backups you have problem of lock backing up with bulk of data. Even in times, where there is not that much traffix? Automatic backup at 3:00 in the morning for example? Sincerely Negin Nickparsa On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Camilo Sperberg unrea...@gmail.comwrote: On Sep 18, 2013, at 09:38, Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you Sebastian..actually I will already have one if qualified for the job. Yes, and I may fail to handle it that's why I asked for guidance. I wanted some tidbits to start over. I have searched through yslow, HTTtrack and others. I have searched through php list in my email too before asking this question. it is kind of beneficial for all people and not has been asked directly. Sincerely Negin Nickparsa On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Sebastian Krebs krebs@gmail.com wrote: 2013/9/18 Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com In general, what are the best ways to handle high traffic websites? VPS(clouds)? web analyzers? dedicated servers? distributed memory cache? Yes :) But seriously: That is a topic most of us spent much time to get into it. You can explain it with a bunch of buzzwords. Additional, how do you define high traffic websites? Do you already _have_ such a site? Or do you _want_ it? It's important, because I've seen it far too often, that projects spent too much effort in their high traffic infrastructure and at the end it wasn't that high traffic ;) I wont say, that you cannot be successfull, but you should start with an effort you can handle. Regards, Sebastian Sincerely Negin Nickparsa -- github.com/KingCrunch Your question is way too vague to be answered properly... My best guess would be that it depends severely on the type of website you have and how's the current implementation being well... implemented. Simply said: what works for Facebook may/will not work for linkedIn, twitter or Google, mainly because the type of search differs A LOT: facebook is about relations between people, twitter is about small pieces of data not mainly interconnected between each other, while Google is all about links and all type of content: from little pieces of information through whole Wikipedia. You could start by studying how varnish and redis/memcached works, you could study about how proxies work (nginx et al), CDNs and that kind of stuff, but if you want more specific answers, you could better ask specific question. In the PHP area, an opcode cache does the job very well and can accelerate the page load by several orders of magnitude, I recommend OPCache, which is already included in PHP 5.5. Greetings. -- github.com/KingCrunch
Re: [PHP] high traffic websites
On 18 Sep 2013, at 12:50, Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com wrote: to be more in details,suppose the website has 80,000 users and each page takes 200 ms to be rendered and you have thousand hits in a second so we want to reduce the time of rendering. is there any way to reduce the rendering time? other thing is suppose they want to upload files simultaneously and the videos are in the website not on another server like YouTube and so streams are really consuming the bandwidth. Also,It is troublesome to get backups,when getting backups you have problem of lock backing up with bulk of data. Your question is impossible to answer efficiently without profiling. You need to know what PHP is doing in those 200ms before you can target your optimisations for maximum effect. I use xdebug to produce trace files. From there I can see exactly what is taking the most amount of time, and then I can look in to how to make that thing faster. When I'm certain there is no faster way to do what it's doing I move on to the next biggest thing. Of course there are generic things you should do such as adding an opcode cache and looking at your server setup, but targeted optimisation is far better than trying generic stuff. -Stuart -- Stuart Dallas 3ft9 Ltd http://3ft9.com/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] high traffic websites
I am a little bit curious: Do you _really_ have 1000 requests/second, or do you just throw some numbers in? ;) Sebastian, supposedly_asking_to_get_some_pre_evaluation :) Even in times, where there is not that much traffix? Automatic backup at 3:00 in the morning for example? 3:00 morning in one country is 9 Am in other country, 3 PM in other country . By the way Thank you so much guys, I wanted tidbits and you gave me more. Stuart, I recall your replies in other situations and always you helped me to improve.list is happy to have you. Sincerely Negin Nickparsa On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Sebastian Krebs krebs@gmail.comwrote: 2013/9/18 Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com Thank you Camilo to be more in details,suppose the website has 80,000 users and each page takes 200 ms to be rendered and you have thousand hits in a second so we want to reduce the time of rendering. is there any way to reduce the rendering time? Read about frontend-/proxy-caching (Nginx, Varnish) and ESI/SSI-include (also NGinx and Varnish ;)). The idea is simply If you don't have to process on every request in the backend, don't process it in the backend on every request. But maybe you mixed up some words, because the rendering time is the time consumed by the renderer within the browser (HTML and CSS). This you can improve, if you improve your HTML/CSS :) I am a little bit curious: Do you _really_ have 1000 requests/second, or do you just throw some numbers in? ;) other thing is suppose they want to upload files simultaneously and the videos are in the website not on another server like YouTube and so streams are really consuming the bandwidth. Well, if there are streams, there are streams. I cannot imagine, that there is another way someone can stream a video without downloading it. Also,It is troublesome to get backups,when getting backups you have problem of lock backing up with bulk of data. Even in times, where there is not that much traffix? Automatic backup at 3:00 in the morning for example? Sincerely Negin Nickparsa On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Camilo Sperberg unrea...@gmail.comwrote: On Sep 18, 2013, at 09:38, Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you Sebastian..actually I will already have one if qualified for the job. Yes, and I may fail to handle it that's why I asked for guidance. I wanted some tidbits to start over. I have searched through yslow, HTTtrack and others. I have searched through php list in my email too before asking this question. it is kind of beneficial for all people and not has been asked directly. Sincerely Negin Nickparsa On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Sebastian Krebs krebs@gmail.com wrote: 2013/9/18 Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com In general, what are the best ways to handle high traffic websites? VPS(clouds)? web analyzers? dedicated servers? distributed memory cache? Yes :) But seriously: That is a topic most of us spent much time to get into it. You can explain it with a bunch of buzzwords. Additional, how do you define high traffic websites? Do you already _have_ such a site? Or do you _want_ it? It's important, because I've seen it far too often, that projects spent too much effort in their high traffic infrastructure and at the end it wasn't that high traffic ;) I wont say, that you cannot be successfull, but you should start with an effort you can handle. Regards, Sebastian Sincerely Negin Nickparsa -- github.com/KingCrunch Your question is way too vague to be answered properly... My best guess would be that it depends severely on the type of website you have and how's the current implementation being well... implemented. Simply said: what works for Facebook may/will not work for linkedIn, twitter or Google, mainly because the type of search differs A LOT: facebook is about relations between people, twitter is about small pieces of data not mainly interconnected between each other, while Google is all about links and all type of content: from little pieces of information through whole Wikipedia. You could start by studying how varnish and redis/memcached works, you could study about how proxies work (nginx et al), CDNs and that kind of stuff, but if you want more specific answers, you could better ask specific question. In the PHP area, an opcode cache does the job very well and can accelerate the page load by several orders of magnitude, I recommend OPCache, which is already included in PHP 5.5. Greetings. -- github.com/KingCrunch
Re: [PHP] high traffic websites
On Sep 18, 2013, at 14:26, Haluk Karamete halukkaram...@gmail.com wrote: I recommend OPCache, which is already included in PHP 5.5. Camilo, I'm just curious about the disadvantageous aspects of OPcache. My logic says there must be some issues with it otherwise it would have come already enabled. Sent from iPhone On Sep 18, 2013, at 2:20 AM, Camilo Sperberg unrea...@gmail.com wrote: On Sep 18, 2013, at 09:38, Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you Sebastian..actually I will already have one if qualified for the job. Yes, and I may fail to handle it that's why I asked for guidance. I wanted some tidbits to start over. I have searched through yslow, HTTtrack and others. I have searched through php list in my email too before asking this question. it is kind of beneficial for all people and not has been asked directly. Sincerely Negin Nickparsa On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Sebastian Krebs krebs@gmail.comwrote: 2013/9/18 Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com In general, what are the best ways to handle high traffic websites? VPS(clouds)? web analyzers? dedicated servers? distributed memory cache? Yes :) But seriously: That is a topic most of us spent much time to get into it. You can explain it with a bunch of buzzwords. Additional, how do you define high traffic websites? Do you already _have_ such a site? Or do you _want_ it? It's important, because I've seen it far too often, that projects spent too much effort in their high traffic infrastructure and at the end it wasn't that high traffic ;) I wont say, that you cannot be successfull, but you should start with an effort you can handle. Regards, Sebastian Sincerely Negin Nickparsa -- github.com/KingCrunch Your question is way too vague to be answered properly... My best guess would be that it depends severely on the type of website you have and how's the current implementation being well... implemented. Simply said: what works for Facebook may/will not work for linkedIn, twitter or Google, mainly because the type of search differs A LOT: facebook is about relations between people, twitter is about small pieces of data not mainly interconnected between each other, while Google is all about links and all type of content: from little pieces of information through whole Wikipedia. You could start by studying how varnish and redis/memcached works, you could study about how proxies work (nginx et al), CDNs and that kind of stuff, but if you want more specific answers, you could better ask specific question. In the PHP area, an opcode cache does the job very well and can accelerate the page load by several orders of magnitude, I recommend OPCache, which is already included in PHP 5.5. Greetings. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php The original RFC states: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/optimizerplus The integration proposed for PHP 5.5.0 is mostly 'soft' integration. That means that there'll be no tight coupling between Optimizer+ and PHP; Those who wish to use another opcode cache will be able to do so, by not loading Optimizer+ and loading another opcode cache instead. As per the Suggested Roadmap above, we might want to review this decision in the future; There might be room for further performance or functionality gains from tighter integration; None are known at this point, and they're beyond the scope of this RFC. So that's why OPCache isn't enabled by default in PHP 5.5 Greetings. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] high traffic websites
2013/9/18 Camilo Sperberg unrea...@gmail.com On Sep 18, 2013, at 14:26, Haluk Karamete halukkaram...@gmail.com wrote: I recommend OPCache, which is already included in PHP 5.5. Camilo, I'm just curious about the disadvantageous aspects of OPcache. My logic says there must be some issues with it otherwise it would have come already enabled. Sent from iPhone On Sep 18, 2013, at 2:20 AM, Camilo Sperberg unrea...@gmail.com wrote: On Sep 18, 2013, at 09:38, Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you Sebastian..actually I will already have one if qualified for the job. Yes, and I may fail to handle it that's why I asked for guidance. I wanted some tidbits to start over. I have searched through yslow, HTTtrack and others. I have searched through php list in my email too before asking this question. it is kind of beneficial for all people and not has been asked directly. Sincerely Negin Nickparsa On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Sebastian Krebs krebs@gmail.com wrote: 2013/9/18 Negin Nickparsa nickpa...@gmail.com In general, what are the best ways to handle high traffic websites? VPS(clouds)? web analyzers? dedicated servers? distributed memory cache? Yes :) But seriously: That is a topic most of us spent much time to get into it. You can explain it with a bunch of buzzwords. Additional, how do you define high traffic websites? Do you already _have_ such a site? Or do you _want_ it? It's important, because I've seen it far too often, that projects spent too much effort in their high traffic infrastructure and at the end it wasn't that high traffic ;) I wont say, that you cannot be successfull, but you should start with an effort you can handle. Regards, Sebastian Sincerely Negin Nickparsa -- github.com/KingCrunch Your question is way too vague to be answered properly... My best guess would be that it depends severely on the type of website you have and how's the current implementation being well... implemented. Simply said: what works for Facebook may/will not work for linkedIn, twitter or Google, mainly because the type of search differs A LOT: facebook is about relations between people, twitter is about small pieces of data not mainly interconnected between each other, while Google is all about links and all type of content: from little pieces of information through whole Wikipedia. You could start by studying how varnish and redis/memcached works, you could study about how proxies work (nginx et al), CDNs and that kind of stuff, but if you want more specific answers, you could better ask specific question. In the PHP area, an opcode cache does the job very well and can accelerate the page load by several orders of magnitude, I recommend OPCache, which is already included in PHP 5.5. Greetings. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php The original RFC states: https://wiki.php.net/rfc/optimizerplus The integration proposed for PHP 5.5.0 is mostly 'soft' integration. That means that there'll be no tight coupling between Optimizer+ and PHP; Those who wish to use another opcode cache will be able to do so, by not loading Optimizer+ and loading another opcode cache instead. As per the Suggested Roadmap above, we might want to review this decision in the future; There might be room for further performance or functionality gains from tighter integration; None are known at this point, and they're beyond the scope of this RFC. So that's why OPCache isn't enabled by default in PHP 5.5 Also worth to mention, that it is the first release with an opcode-cache integrated. Giving the other some release to get used to it, sounds useful :) Greetings. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- github.com/KingCrunch
