On 8/11/05, Matt Raible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 8/11/05, Elias Torres <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 8/11/05, Allen Gilliland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > excellent, thanks for the info guys. > > > > > > yeah ... 9000 blogs is a lot and in truth i'm not even sure any system > > > could really handle much more than that in a truly dynamic fashion. rss > > > feeds are pretty easy to cache because they aren't as complex, but the > > > pages themselves are more complicated and there are a number of possible > > > views of the page data which makes caching even harder. > > > > > > i am particularly intrigued that you both commented about the use of > > > static html pages. i think this would be a great option for Roller and > > > it would be very cool if we could be pretty sneaky about it and actually > > > use the same url structure that exists now, but just map to raw html > > > files on the backend. we should do some investigations on this, but i > > > certainly like the idea of having the option to use static html pages. > > > > > > > I'm not sure we would want J2EE container serving files though. Also, > > just like wordpress we don't have to match the file structure, because > > we can have a set of URLRewrites to map to whichever structure we > > please on the filesystem. I mean MovableType, Blogger works this way, > > why can't we do the same for Roller. We are right now in the process > > of deciding what our solution will be to replace our existing server, > > but those limits we see for Roller will hurt us for a company of the > > size of IBM. Nothing can beat static content performance. What do you > > guys think? > > I agree that static content performance is good - but we'd likely have > to generate the static content from the HTML content each time it > changed. If we did this, you could literally get 1000s of pages for > one blog, since there are many different views if you change the date. > I'm fine with doing this, but it'd likely result in lots of disk > space required. > > Matt
I don't think we should worry about disk space, especially when contrasted to the performance gains we would get from static content. I would highly doubt the entire JRoller content being more than one 1GB of generated HTML content. That's nothing, if being served by apache via static files, compared to the machinery that it takes to run it dynamic. Roller is growing quite rapidly and it needs to perform as more people are interested in it. > > > > > > Matt, if you are curious about your cache performance then you can turn > > > up the debugging on the LRUCacheHandler2 class (i believe that's the > > > right one). This will flood your logs with lots of messages about cache > > > hits and misses so make sure and watch your log files sizes, but it'll > > > give you the info you need. Another good idea is to turn on garbage > > > collection debugging messages so you can see how much of your heap you > > > are using. With 9000 blogs my guess is that your caches are pretty > > > overwhelmed, but I would also guess that if you check your the garbage > > > collection after a Full GC that you probably have a little more room in > > > your heap to increase the sizes. > > > > > > -- Allen > > > > > > > > > Matthew P. Schmidt wrote: > > > > > > > I'll share. We have about 9000 blogs with rapid growth. Its running > > > > on one dual xeon, on MySQL and Resin and uses about a 1.6G heap with 3 > > > > 3000 item caches (page, rss, last modified). I'm not sure how much > > > > they're actually being used. Load is generally pretty manageable, > > > > especially with the latest version of Roller. As for hits, most of > > > > it is RSS, with several million hits of that per month. There are > > > > also a million or more blog views per month and the server doesn't > > > > generally have to restart that often. Before merging our fork with > > > > Roller 1.2, we were restarting every night due to a memory leak. Our > > > > biggest problem is probably the amount of referrer spam, even with a > > > > healthy blacklist of dirty words. I think static HTML for the pages > > > > (which they basically are now if your cache is big enough) and a > > > > better referrer filter would be two big helpers for us. > > > > Matthew P. Schmidt > > > > Vice President of Technology > > > > Javalobby.org > > > > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Phone: 919.678.0300 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Elias Torres wrote: > > > > > > > >> We have also around 1800 blogs and it's growing rapidly. Also, around > > > >> 12K people make use of the system in total and this we know because we > > > >> don't allow anonymous comments. You need to be authenticated for > > > >> someone to comment/post. > > > >> > > > >> I wonder why you are not allowed to give out server info. Maybe I'll > > > >> hold off on that too for now. > > > >> > > > >> I'm sure others have asked this before, but is there a plan of turning > > > >> Roller blogs into static HTML? I'd be interested in hearing your > > > >> thoughts on this. I'm sure this would alleviate many of the caching > > > >> performance problems. > > > >> > > > >> Elias > > > >> > > > >> On 8/9/05, Allen Gilliland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>> I am diverging from the deployments discussion for a second because > > > >>> Elias comment sparked a question. I'm interested in anything that > > > >>> anyone wants to share about their roller installation ... > > > >>> > > > >>> how many blogs does it have? > > > >>> what is your performance like? > > > >>> what are your cache size settings? > > > >>> how good is your caching efficiency on average? > > > >>> any numbers on how much activity the site gets? hits/visits? load? > > > >>> server info? processors? ram? OS? webserver? database? > > > >>> how is stability? does the server require restarts often? > > > >>> > > > >>> anything that can be shared would be cool. i'd like to keep some > > > >>> info on who is running roller and in what kind of environments so > > > >>> that we can hopefully make sure we are keeping roller well suited > > > >>> for various situations. > > > >>> > > > >>> blogs.sun.com currently has almost 1600 blogs on it and our > > > >>> stability is quite good. i would give out server info, but i'm not > > > >>> allowed to. probably our biggest performance concern is page > > > >>> caching, which has gotten worse and worse as more people start > > > >>> blogging. i think out cache size is 4000 right now and that is > > > >>> plenty for the rss cache, but the page cache is still overwhelmed :/ > > > >>> > > > >>> anyways ... how about others? > > > >>> > > > >>> -- Allen > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 13:59, Elias Torres wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>>> I'm also not an official part of the project, but I might be running > > > >>>> the second or third largest Roller-based website ;-) and my opinion > > > >>>> if > > > >>>> it counts at all, is that if Dave/Allen can handle the heat in the > > > >>>> kitchen, let them stay in the kitchen. I'm sure that's why they pay > > > >>>> them the big bucks. > > > >>>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > >
