Yes, this is all very good news. I'm quiet happy to not have to make  
any caching or lookup improvements and it makes all the more sense to  
base this project on Radiant. Daniel, thanks very much for explaining  
this and doing the original benchmarks. I hope that once this project  
is done it can serve as an example of this sort of performance in  
practice.

As for page depth, the current content organization is pretty  
abnormal / chaotic, reminiscient of 12 years of static file  
maintenance. I have some 400 page nodes which will be 200+ pages down  
the tree, currently with around 400 pages at the root level. So for  
now, other than the file import routine, I'll focus my energies on a  
"SiteGrande" Admin interface extension which will, among other things:

* Visually compress the page tree (restyle the current page tree  
getting dropping the page icons and the variation in font-size  
between node levels, reduce the row height, etc.)
* Add an "Edit from this root" link which would filter the page view  
to that node inward with a "back" link of some sort
* Search / Live Search capacity in some form

Thanks much for the comments so far,

Loren

Ps. Anybody who wants work and has experience batch processing legacy  
HTML should contact me :)


On Sep 14, 2007, at 7:24 AM, Sean Cribbs wrote:

> See, this is why it's awesome to have a performance guru on the core
> team.  Thank you for clearing up some misunderstandings of mine.
>
> Loren, if we assume that 500,000 unique visitors in a month and every
> one of them requested only 1 page, that would still only be 0.19
> requests per second.  It would take each of them requesting 1000 pages
> per visit to even reach the benchmark Daniel cites.  So, I think  
> Daniel
> may be right in the 100 req/sec vs. 600 req/sec debate.  The only  
> issue
> then is to make sure that any extensions you add or create don't slow
> things down or make them too unstable.
>
> Like Daniel suggested, your issue may then be the admin UI, which will
> take a long time to render if your structure is really flat.  One  
> thing
> we may do for Digital Pulp (even though their estimated site size is
> around 300 pages) is to add a live-search box to the site map so pages
> can be quickly found.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Sean
>
> Daniel Sheppard wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I seem to remember this in another caching discussion: what about
>>> response headers?  From what I recall, browsers won't allow you  
>>> to use
>>> meta tags for evey header, so simply caching the html won't
>>> necessarily fill every need.
>>>
>>> Could the caching scheme be extended to store and transmit cached
>>> headers as well?
>>>
>>
>> The current system already does. If people start talking about  
>> handing
>> off the caching to the web server instead, there's not really any way
>> to do that without customising your web server to some extent.
>>
>> If somebody finds radiant's caching performance inadequate, the next
>> logical step that I can see is to implement the caching as it  
>> currently
>> functions in the webserver.
>>
>> That would either be in the form of an apache module or a custom  
>> handler
>> for mongrel (I'd say the later would be the best first step).
>>
>> If you've got the sort of traffic where this matters to you (very few
>> people will), your choices are:
>>
>> a) develop an apache module / mongrel handler to handle caching
>> b) pay someone (me? I like money) to do that for you
>> c) rethink your business model so that you have the money for a)  
>> or b)
>>
>> Dan.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Radiant mailing list
>> Post:   [email protected]
>> Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/
>> Site:   http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Radiant mailing list
> Post:   [email protected]
> Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/
> Site:   http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant

_______________________________________________
Radiant mailing list
Post:   [email protected]
Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/
Site:   http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant

Reply via email to