[Zope] Zope fine tuning HOW-TO / Zope Performance

Ragnar Beer rbeer@uni-goettingen.de
Tue, 18 Apr 2000 10:29:19 +0200


What about using the cache with ProxyPass and still serving static 
stuff from Zope? The problem I have with ProxyPass is mod_proxy's 
documentation which is terribly little. I couldn't find out whether 
it's possible to use caching with ProxyPass. I didn't get any speedup 
with cache enabled and expires set to 1h later. Anyone tried 
something similar?

What about Squid in between (in http accelerator mode)?

--Ragnar

>"J. Atwood" wrote:
>  >
>  > Are you sure that serving images off of Apache has any effect on
>  > performance? I did a lot of testing on that (below) and did see any major
>  > difference whether Zope served up the image or Apache did (out of a Zope
>  > document). There was a slight increase but not enough (I felt) to deal with
>  > the extra hassles of not having the images in Zope.
>
>YES.  I am sure that serving images off Apache has a big effect on
>performance.  Not only does Apache serving blow the pants off zope
>serving it alows some of the workload to be offloaded to a system that
>scales better when hit w/ high concurrent requests.  I would say a
>performance increase of 3x to 9x is worth the extra configuration work.
>
>Here are some numbers from my tests w/ ab:
>
>Test using ab requesting the same 25K image via three access methods:
>
>1 - Apache Direct: using one file check in httpd.conf to check for
>existence of file and serving it from FS if it exists.
>
>2 - Zope via FCGI: using mod_FastCGI from Apache to retrieve image from
>a Zope server on a separate server from Apache.
>
>3 - Zope Direct: using port 8080 accessing Zope directly and requesting
>the same image.
>
>
>Image Size:  25,646 bytes
>
>rps = Request per second
>min = Connection Times (ms) Total: line min column
>min = Connection Times (ms) Total: line avg column
>min = Connection Times (ms) Total: line max column
>
>
>		rps	min	avg	max
>
>-n 10 -c 1
>=============================================
>Apache Direct	 84.03	  11	  11	  12  (3x over Zope Direct)
>Zope via FCGI	 11.83	  44	  84	 245
>Zope Direct	 22.32	  28	  44	 139
>
>And if these numbers aren't enough, the chasim just grows from there.
>FCGI does add some overhead but if you're caching to FS that overhead
>quickly becomes nominal when you figure the increased serving speed of
>going staight from file.
>
>
>-n 100 -c 10 (run 1)
>=============================================
>Apache Direct	137.36	  15	  67	 188  (9x over Zope Direct)
>Zope via FCGI	 14.26	 215	 667	1953
>Zope Direct	 15.55	 289	 615	 805
>
>-n 100 -c 10 (run 2)
>=============================================
>Apache Direct	142.65	  15	  65	 320
>Zope via FCGI	 18.55	 314	 523	1558
>Zope Direct	 15.19	 352	 624	 819
>
>-n 100 -c 10 (run 3)
>=============================================
>Apache Direct	117.10	  17	  77	 282
>Zope via FCGI	 16.45	 495	 582	 914
>Zope Direct	 17.51	 178	 556	 909
>
>
>
>-n 100 -c 25 (run 1)
>=============================================
>Apache Direct	136.99	  19	 162	 336
>Zope via FCGI	 11.89	1359	1937	3050
>Zope Direct	 15.40	 238	1432	1759
>
>-n 100 -c 25 (run 2)
>=============================================
>Apache Direct	139.47	  18	 153	 318
>Zope via FCGI	 15.67	 632	1423	2103
>Zope Direct	 15.64	 270	1402	1731
>
>-n 100 -c 25 (run 3)
>=============================================
>Apache Direct	124.69	  19	 173	 414
>Zope via FCGI	 14.23	 700	1550	2119
>Zope Direct	 15.53	 379	1427	1755
>
>
>
>RE: your test suite.
>
>What where you actually testing in the ab printouts?  I'm confused how
>you could test image serving rates using ab against test.html.  Wouldn't
>that just test the load times for the HTML and not the images?
>
>
>Don't get me wrong I'm not saying zope is not the greatest dynamic
>serving enviroment I've every used.  It is.  I'm just pointing out when
>it comes to serving a site that's expected to get some serious load,
>look to the tools at your disposal.  Zope alone may not make the cut,
>but Zope/Apache is truely a great combination.  The configuration pains
>are more than worth it.
>
>--
>-------------------------------
>tonyr@ep.newtimes.com
>Director of Web Technology
>New Times, Inc.
>-------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
>http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
>**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
>(Related lists -
>  http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
>  http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )