Have same problem: all pages a responsed with 200 code.
First of all i'd check:
SiteController.cache_timeout ~1 day
Radiant::Config['dev.host'] is different from production
Page.find_by_parent_id(nil).cache? true
Header of response:
Server nginx
Date Wed, 02 Feb 2011 09:47:49 GMT
Content-Type text/css; charset=utf-8
Etag "38be3c15a36887587a1525cfaa502e2d"
X-Rack-Cache fresh
X-Content-Digest ea5fdfe604039430439328a42d4145db2b392311
X-Runtime 138
Content-Length 2180
Cache-Control max-age=2592000, public
Age 381
"Cache" tab in firebug for this page:
Last Modified Wed Feb 02 2011 12:06:15 GMT+0200 (MSK)
Last Fetched Wed Feb 02 2011 12:07:14 GMT+0200 (MSK)
Expires Fri Mar 04 2011 11:47:49 GMT+0200 (MSK)
Data Size 2180
Fetch Count 22
Device memory
Same result I receive for all pages (include css and js driven by
radiant) an on each loading;
Radiant version 0.9.2
Any suggestion?
Is it right, that tmp/cache/meta file include user-related information
like HTTP_COOKIE (with google analytic cookies information) and
HTTP_CACHE_CONTROL "max-age=0"
On Jan 26, 10:50 pm, Carl Youngblood <c...@youngbloods.org> wrote:
> Anton, I'm not denying that the site could be optimized significantly,
> but those optimizations are orders of magnitude less important than
> fixing this problem I'm having with 30s refreshes. Until I resolve
> that, all these other techniques are superfluous. As they say, work on
> the bottlenecks. Besides, these images are being cached just fine by
> repeat visits. But the caching problem we're having is making the site
> unusable. Your suggestions are right on the money; I have been
> studying these techniques as well, but I'd like to deal with this
> larger problem first. The fact remains that two refreshes in a row
> both get 200 responses, so rack-cache is not working or else something
> in radiant is screwing things up. Thanks for your suggestions.
>
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Anton J Aylward
>
> <radi...@antonaylward.com> wrote:
> > Carl Youngblood said the following on 01/25/2011 05:01 PM:
>
> >> to respond to Anton's previous comments, firebug shows that nearly all
> >> the delay is spent waiting for the server.
>
> > Of course it is, but that isn't what I meant.
>
> > You have a lot of images of your page.
> > You have javascript and CSS.
> > You also have in-line Javascript and in-line CSS which is a drag on
> > performance!
>
> > You have images that sequence. That big block run under javascript.
> > Why not combine those images into one and use a CSS sprite? Yes, a
> > bigger download but only ONE download. And there are various ways you
> > can optimise the image so that its size is actually less than the size
> > of the sum of the images.
>
> > Your page layout is such that your browser cannot render ANYTHING until
> > it has all arrived from the server. If it has to scale images or wait
> > for (all) the images to arrive to work out the layout then things are
> > even worse!
>
> > Of your "30 seconds", 27 of them are the latency of downloading those
> > HTML and embedded CSS images. You have over 60 images on that page.
>
> > If they are fetched sequentially, waiting for one to complete before
> > fetching the next, you have a worst-case situation. You should set up
> > your browser to have multiple persistent parallel connections and fetch
> > them in parallel. IE8 defualts to only 2 parallel connections, which
> > for the type of page you have is crippling.
>
> > Explaiantion at
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_persistent_connection
>
> > There is also a differnece in how http/1.0 and http/1.1 handle this.
> > I see you are using 1.0.
>
> > See
> >https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/extra-fasterfoxx/
> > whcih tweaks these settings:
> > user_pref("network.http.max-connections", 40);
> > user_pref("network.http.max-connections-per-server", 16);
> > user_pref("network.http.max-persistent-connections-per-proxy", 12);
> > user_pref("network.http.max-persistent-connections-per-server", 6);
> > user_pref("nglayout.initialpaint.delay", 0);
>
> > However this only makes sense if your Apapche is configured with http
> > 'keep-alive'
> >http://httpd.apache.org/docs/1.3/keepalive.html
>
> > See also
> >http://www.technewsworld.com/story/it-management/64924.html?wlc=12959...
>
> > These pages on page design and layout address my other points
> >http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/rules.html
> > As it says:
> > <quote>
> > Reducing the number of HTTP requests in your page is the place to start.
> > This is the most important guideline for improving performance for first
> > time visitors
> > </quote>
> > You have a killer number of requests on your front page!
>
> > Layout of the elements of the page can also be critical
> > Take a look at the Cuzillion design tool to optimize your layout.
> >http://stevesouders.com/cuzillion/
>
> > Looking at the soruce of your pages I see you are very ehavy on your DOM
> > elements. You keep using constructs like
>
> > <div .... content-...-outer ..>
> > <div .... content-...-inner ..>
>
> > These could be merged in the CSS, making the CSS smaller (cna why not
> > compress it?) and fewer DOM elelment for the browser to deal with.
>
> > The number of DOM elements is easy to test, just type in Firebug's console:
> > document.getElementsByTagName('*').length
>
> > --
> > Wherever you see a successful business, someone once made a courageous
> > decision.
> > --Peter F. Drucker
>
>
