This is serious indeed. We are constantly watching for speed issues, but some are harder to tackle then others. But I agree that we should keep the number of queries to an absolute minimum.

What strikes me as odd is that your site isn't the biggest site around using XOOPS, and we've asked for stress test results, but none of the bigger sites do those (strangely enough). XOOPS.org runs on a dedicated server with -I think- a 1.5 Ghz AMD processor, 1GB RAM and Red Hat Linux. The only times this site gets into trouble is when it is under attack (2-3 times a month), or when a bot slips though and exectues too many simultaneous queries (50+ connections at a time for the bot only). And we had some issues with the wiki, where the search feature didn't close the connections.
XOOPS benefits a lot from caching, as it brings down the number of queries a lot (potentially).

But again, I agree that speed and resource use are very important issues. So yes, we are listening (this has ALWAYS been one of the top issues with XOOPS development). But don't discount the idea of the server being inadequate or misconfigured yet. I've experienced a lot of changes in resource availability with different versions and combo's with apache, php and linux distros. Server config is very important as well... And then there are the optimisers like Zend has. And the MySQL server config as well. Lots and lots of factors are at play here. It is a complex matter indeed.

Herko

Quote:

And this may well be your problem. Apart from my own sites, I also help admin an IIS support site which gets between 20~30 users (actual users, not what's reported by the "who's online" module as it's known to be inaccurate) at any one time. Still not as much as your site granted, but we extensively use the block caching & module caching feature which drastically decreased sever load using very similar system specs, except running Microsoft OS and IIS. Have a look at the performance gains I found here on my own site through the use of caching. Finding the right balance between caching and ensuring up to date data is a tricky thing to get right, but a very worthwhile investment in time.

The other very influencial factor is your theme and template structure. According to IBM Page Detailer (must have free software) loading your site (http://www.roundballcity.com) over my 512/512 SDSL connection from Australia took 9.35 seconds, which isn't too bad. however, total site sized weighed in at 155kb, with 21 http requests, which again isn't too bad, but could be optimised to vastly increase loading times and decrease server load and bandwidth usage.

Finally, you really need to look at optimising your news posts. You have over 700 news items which are not archived, plus the fact you are not using cache would mean you'd be spanking the heck out of any server you throw at your site. This would be regardless of what CMS you are using.

I understand your frustration, I really do. But I'd advise you to get back to the basics of optimizing XOOPS to serve you better. At the moment you have a huge content & user base using what looks to be an almost out of the box implementation of Xoops. I'd be glad to help if you need it.

I believe this site has been bumped from several providers because of resouce consumption.

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.roundballcity.com%2Fxoops%2Fmodules%2Fnews%2F

It may be advantageous to clean up your code. Click on the above link. It is the W3C validator. It shows 338 errors.

And the server may not be up to the task. 1.7 Ghz may be minimal but ok, but I think 512 mb RAM is too little for MySQL and Apache.

Herko

Being non compliant for XHTML and CCS is fairly common place among themes & template systems used in Xoops. There are some very slick themes out there though that will significantly reduce page weight. Have a look at a few themes by 7dana and StudioC.

http://www.studiocreativ.net/

This is a particulary good example of how lean an XOOPS theme & template system can be. This site is XHTML & CSS compliant, and only weighs in at around 70k with 11 http requests. That's less than half of what your site generates in size and http requests each time a new user connects, and in the instance of having a large user base it is easy to see how thiswould have enormous impact on performance.

Maybe someone can scourge through these forums and create a FAQ on site performance and optimisation? This is valuable info...

Herko

One more thought on the subject.

You may be taking the problem with when you change sites. As I have mention before. Your database may need to be optimized. If you just back-it up and take it with you, so will you take the problem with you. I am not a MySql expert but I have been advised by one that it is necessary, also to add index fields to make the queries go faster. I would look here before looking anywhere else. I got the information from dotgeek.org I believe his username was gurugeek.

I can not emphasize this enough. With a hundred queries per page the problem will lie here.

Quote:

A very good idea, and one I'd take on myselft if I didn't already have a full plate. Maybe in another few months when I have freed myself of the few tasks I have set myself I have a go at tackling it.

If you have MySQL Admin:
Login, select catalogs, select your database, highlight all tables, and click "optimize";

Quote:

A minor upkeep job that easily gets overlooked, thanks for the reminder