Quote:
WarDick wrote:
Ever since reading this post I have been having nightmares about reaching and exceeding the connection limits of XOOPS.
Every person who has ever questioned the limits has been more or less attacked or at least treated harshly when they have expressed concerns over the connection ceiling.
Let's look at possibilities with an open mind. Have they been reached at less than 200 connections or not?
I propose a stress test.
What better place than right here on this forum.
It is running on an XOOPS optimized server??
It is setup and maintained by the experts.
We have enough registered members to conduct such a test.
To proof test the connections limits would require everyone to sign on at one time and use the site as you normally would, reading the news, searching the forums, what ever you do when you log in.
All thats left is to have a community support member set up a time and date to conduct this test. Plus the willingness of the community to participate in the test.
Lets find out where we stand. Is XOOPS a toy or a tool?
I do admit some people get a bit "touchy" when XOOPS is spoken of in a less than favourable light. However, the majority of the time this is in response to posts that are not totally reasonable and/or fair. I don't see anyone in this thread being attacked, what I do see is almost everyone who has responded to this thread to date offering to help. As has been mentioned XOOPS will have a limit, but many variables go into determining this, such as hardware, OS, XOOPS and webserver performance tuning, so there is no such thing as a one size fits all answer.
On a high volume website, the three major hardware components that are going to get hammered are CPU, RAM and Harddisk. A celeron is hardly a server class CPU, and a standard IDE hardisk isn't either, but they should be sufficient to serve a high volume website without raising too much of a sweat IF THE SOFTWARE IS TUNED.
Coming from a Microsoft background by tuned I mean;
(1) OS - Using a server class operating system all unecessary services disabled, and that only the services/applications you NEED are installed. This will free significant resources in an Windows environment.
(2) Webserver - Is tuned to maximize resource usage. Running PHP in fast_cgi mode on IIS brings significant performance gains under load, As does tuning IIS itself with http compression and things of that sort.
(3) XOOPS - the site ylw633 is running is 150K worth in nearly 40 http requests, which quite expensive for a high traffic site. Using a fast performing theme such as some o the ones produced by 7dana, StudioC, Incarma and tjnemez will greatly increase site performance. As will caching (module & block) which can make an enourmous difference to site performance which ylw633 said he had not enabled at all. This means for every single site load the database will be getting absolutely hammered. I cut the number of SQL queries being reun be site load by over 60% by using the cache system (unless cache has expired that is).
Although my background sits with Microsoft, the same performance tuning concepts are going to apply no matter what environment you use. You just can't expect an out of the box implementation of any system to be able to adequately serve a large volume of users, it just doesn't make sense. If Ferrari sent Michael out in a F1 car to try and win a GP straight after they had assemble it without letting the technicians get in there and tune it, you would think they were crazy. Same goes for trying to serve a high performance website, or anything demanding high performance. As for stress testing, why not purchase & use one of the many web stress tools out there?
Anyway, to cut an extreme rant short
, what I'm trying to say is that wether XOOPS is a toy or a tool depends greatly on the person(s) driving it.