[TYPO3-Performance] Where to put the "meat"?

[Dan Osipov]

Thanks Georg,

That is exactly the set up we are planning at this time, however due to 
limited budget we can't set up a cluster of DB at this time, and will 
have to resort to using just one server. This creates a possible failure 
point, but will have to work with it for now. I am just hoping that the 
DB server doesn't choke...

Dan Osipov
Calkins Media
http://danosipov.com/blog/

georg kuehnberger wrote:
> Dan,
> rethinking my previous post I'd like to add:
> 
> I feel the key parameters to answer your question probably are the 
> desired amount of:
> - flexibility / scalability (incl. performance) and
> - security (failover / high-availability),
> 
> Below I depicted a setup we just recently did for a client of ours 
> (custom LAMP Application),
> which offers a meaningful maximum on all of the above (within the given 
> budget).
> In this case we did it with real boxes, however you could also do the 
> same with any performant virtualization (eg. IBM p5, XEN..), which 
> offers even more flexibility.
> 
> Lesson learned throughout the years:
> You can do your best calculations and guestimate and do several tests 
> upfront in order to scale right fpr the initial setup. However you WILL 
> have to adjust ressources and configuration afterwards; if even only 
> because the characteristics of your applications is changing - which it 
> will (think TYPO3 3.5 > 4.2).
> 
> hth, regards georg
> 
> The below allows for:
> - easy scale out: just adding boxes @ X
> - easy scale adjustment: move box between DB-Cluster and Web-SRV-Cluster.
> 
> ----------- LOADBALANCER ---------
>    |       |       |       |
> APACHE   APACHE   APACHE  APACHE-X
>    |       |       |       |
> -------- SWITCH ------------------
>        |        |
>     ccontr1 -- ccontr2
>     |    |      |    |
> cdbb1   cdbb2  cdbb3 cdbb4  - cdbb-X
> 
> 
> APACHE - WebServer, PHP / App-Server, optionally incl. reverse Proxy
> ccontrX - Continuent Controller
> cdbbX - Continuent DB-Backend X
> 
> 
> 
> georg kuehnberger wrote:
>> Dan Osipov wrote:
>>> Writing static files makes sense, however, we are moving towards more 
>>> personalized content, that is constantly updating, so this is against 
>>> what we're doing... We are planning to rely on Typo3 caching as well 
>>> as PHP accelerators.
>>>
>>> Our servers are fairly good, with several Quad core processors and up 
>>> to 16 Gb of RAM. We just need to decide if we want to put them 
>>> towards handling MySQL tasks or PHP?
>>
>> IMHO: put them (cpu & mem - Ressources) on PHP, where they will be 
>> needed more;
>>
>> in addition:
>> a) (as Olivier stated) using nginx, squid or whatever rev proxy will 
>> massively releave your apaches at virtually no cost.
>>
>> b) as for the db you might also consider the commercial version of 
>> sequoia www.continuent.com which we recently made excellent experience 
>> with.
>>
>> regards georg
>>
>>> Dan Osipov
>>> Calkins Media
>>> http://danosipov.com/blog/
>>>
>>> Olivier Dobberkau wrote:
>>>> Dan Osipov schrieb:
>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> my suggestion:
>>>>
>>>> try to avoid typo3 for the frontend stuff as much as possible... :-)
>>>>
>>>> use nginx to deliver static file, like statified html, jpg, pdf, etc
>>>> instead of apache with php using your memory on the app servers.
>>>>
>>>> -> nginx (proxy) -> apache -> php -> typo3
>>>>
>>>> use a much caching as possible.
>>>>
>>>> loadbalance the stuff. get as much memory per server as possible.
>>>>
>>>> take a look at mysql proxy and use a master slave setup.
>>>>
>>>> hope this gives you some thoughs..
>>>>
>>>> olivier