Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

Re: nCache, Varnish Performance

Kon Wilms
January 28, 2010 05:30PM
My 2c to add - we run a CDN and serve all content for http through
nginx servers. I experimented with varnish as an upstream *and*
downstream cache to nginx for about a week on some test nodes when we
were experiencing high load (our http traffic is all media assets and
no html or video/audio) and noticed no measurable benefit (i.e.
numbers that would justify deploying it) despite tuning varnish in
various caching modes/rulesets. In fact in a few configurations I
noticed a performance hit on serving traffic.

HTH

Cheers
Kon

On 1/28/10, Jérôme Loyet <jerome@loyet.net> wrote:
> 2010/1/28 AMP Admin <admin@ampprod.com>:
>
> > Is xCache something different all together? I know it's for caching php but
> > is it recommended to use nCache, proxy_cache, or Varnish if you're already
> > using xCahce?
>
>
> definitely ! xcache cache only PHP opcodes. PHP code is still executed
> for each page. front end caches (proxy_pass, ncache, ...) makes
> dynamic requests (php) into static ones (files). It's all different
> and complementary.
>
> ++ Jerome
>
>
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Piotr Sikora [mailto:piotr.sikora@frickle.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 4:01 PM
> > To: nginx@nginx.org
> > Subject: Re: nCache, Varnish Performance
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >> Is nCache and Varnish far better than proxy_cache?
> >
> > >From http://code.google.com/p/ncache/:
> > "NCache is now in nginx core , you can use it as nginx proxy cache."
> >
> > I don't use Varnish, but I'm pretty sure it isn't _far_ better.
> > But the answer really depends on your exact use-case.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Piotr Sikora < piotr.sikora@frickle.com >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > nginx mailing list
> > nginx@nginx.org
> > http://nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > nginx mailing list
> > nginx@nginx.org
> > http://nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> nginx mailing list
> nginx@nginx.org
> http://nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
>

_______________________________________________
nginx mailing list
nginx@nginx.org
http://nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
Subject Author Posted

nginx as a caching reverse proxy to replace squid/varnish

mobiledreamers@gmail.com August 17, 2009 05:39PM

Re: nginx as a caching reverse proxy to replace squid/varnish

Mirosław Jaworski August 18, 2009 03:53AM

nCache, Varnish Performance

princeap January 27, 2010 10:57PM

Re: nCache, Varnish Performance

merlin corey January 28, 2010 04:46PM

Re: nCache, Varnish Performance

Piotr Sikora January 28, 2010 05:04PM

RE: nCache, Varnish Performance

testbot January 28, 2010 05:14PM

Re: nCache, Varnish Performance

Jérôme Loyet January 28, 2010 05:20PM

RE: nCache, Varnish Performance

testbot January 28, 2010 05:26PM

Re: nCache, Varnish Performance

Kon Wilms January 28, 2010 05:30PM

Re: nCache, Varnish Performance

Maxim Dounin January 28, 2010 06:00PM

Re: nCache, Varnish Performance

Piotr Sikora January 28, 2010 06:14PM

Re: nCache, Varnish Performance

Ryan Malayter January 28, 2010 06:12PM

Re: nCache, Varnish Performance

Luca De Marinis January 29, 2010 04:52AM

Re: nCache, Varnish Performance

Akins, Brian February 01, 2010 08:04AM

Re: nginx as a caching reverse proxy to replace squid/varnish

Igor Sysoev August 19, 2009 08:38AM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 192
Record Number of Users: 8 on April 13, 2023
Record Number of Guests: 421 on December 02, 2018
Powered by nginx      Powered by FreeBSD      PHP Powered      Powered by MariaDB      ipv6 ready