Thank's for this hack.
But one question.
how much save resources, relative standard XOOPS?
Thank's!
next question
// debug mode (you can see the hit ratio by counting fullcache/result)
define( 'FASTESTCACHE_DEBUG' , false ) ;
Where can see this?
you can see it in
XOOPS_TRUST_PATH.'/fullcache/result'
count each lines
I can't understand what you mean.
explain with detail.
Quote:
Just a case in this site:
Save 30% of CPU
Use another 30~50Mbyte HDD
GIJOE: will the hack reduce the number of database queries? tl
hi tl.
Quote:
will the hack reduce the number of database queries?
Perhaps, 30% of queries are reduced.
Thanks GIJOE.
The reason for asking that was that when I enabled the hack, the number of queries was not reduced (according to a xoops logger I used). Although I did not test it for long.
My host limits the number of queries per hour. It would be of great help in reducing the number of queries. Xoops caching does not cache pagetitles so it is almost of no help.
I have some blocks cached, should I keep the block cache on while using the hack?
Thanks again,
tl
Quote:
The reason for asking that was that when I enabled the hack, the number of queries was not reduced (according to a xoops logger I used). Although I did not test it for long.
If you runs XOOPS with appropriate block caches, FCH cannot reduce queries effectively.
Quote:
My host limits the number of queries per hour. It would be of great help in reducing the number of queries. Xoops caching does not cache pagetitles so it is almost of no help.
Number of queries?
It's non-sense.
MySQL works quite fast with little and many queries.
Despite MySQL works slowly with big and few queries.
Quote:
I have some blocks cached, should I keep the block cache on while using the hack?
I think so.
Quote:
Number of queries?
It's non-sense.
Don't laugh, yep, it is true.
My host has a dedicated pool of MySQL servers but limits the number of queries per hour to prevent abuse, I guess. Other than the queries limit, I am very happy with the host. Well, if time comes, then I will have to move to a dedicated server.
Thanks for the quick answers. I think the block cache should be removed. First of all, the pages would be double-cached. There is no need for that as FCH is sufficient enough. Secondly, block cache might cause logging-in delays.
I had one block cache enabled and user login page " Thank for ... if ..., blah.. " was stuck for a quite long period of time before finally logging users in. The problem disappeared after the block cache was removed.
So far, FCH has been working great. Thank you for a great hack!
tl
hi tl.
Quote:
I assume the javascript is not affected by the cache. I have a page counter in javascript and it seems to be working fine under the cache.
It sounds naturally from the point of view of the FCH's mechanism.
Counters using JavaScript will work fine FCH.