Drupal 5.8 vs Drupal 6.3: performance
arhak - July 22, 2008 - 21:13
I'm testing both Drupal 5.8 and 6.3, both clean installation, no extra modules.
Is Drupal 6.3 so slow??
I think it has to be some wrong configuration on PHP, right?
Drupal 5.8 is performing very fast
Drupal 6.3 is performing really slow!
Comments?
There are many factors at
There are many factors at play.
- Check the performance settings (cache and css aggregation) of the two sites. D6 uses lots of css files if not aggregated.
- Using the devel module you can count and time the database queries which run on a page in either version.
- Or it may be the javascript which executes on the user's PC (there is much more of that in D6).
Both: no cache, garland, welcome page => min query, js disabled
In both cases:
- without cache
- garland
- the very first welcome page which implies only the session related query (at most 2 simple queries)
- javascript disabled
- same PC
- same browsers
Didn't understand
Look at the html source of
Look at the html source of D6 in your browser and it will become clear. Each module may add its own css and/or js files. That was why css and js aggregation was added in the performance options in D6.
Although I doubt that this is the problem here... Loading a few files should only take milliseconds on a Web server optimized for this kind of things. (Except if it is a local installation on a desktop PC).
Well... yeah
Yes, it's without CSS nor JS aggregation because it's not on production.
And yes, in a desktop PC.
Nevertheless, it's a huge difference...
Off course, it doesn't bothers me knowing the improvements or the capabilities of Drupal 6.x, I was just wondering.
And I hope the aggregation would make an improvement as you said (when in a testing/production server).
I assume then, there is nothing to worry about.
Thanks
The answers you seek will be
The answers you seek will be found by firefox+firebug I believe.
HillsWeb.com
Well this is happening on: -
Well this is happening on:
- Windows+IE6
- Windows+FF2
- Debian+FF2
- Ubuntu+FF2
(All FireFox with Firebug and Developer Toolbar, yes)
In firebug under the Net
In firebug under the Net tab you can see how long exactly every single item on the page is loading, php/html, javascript, css, image, etc, whatever is there, and compare the two sites.
HillsWeb.com
Thanks!
Thanks, I'll track it down.
Whose fault is it? / MINE it is!
When monitoring with Firebug all times are small, every piece has a download time between 100ms and 2s (styles.css not catched)
BUT, the first element (whose time is 100ms) takes several seconds for starting.
I don't know why Firebug counts such small elapsed time since I have to wait for the first result showing up.
This happens only with Drupal 6 (now testing with two of them) and no with Drupal 5.
BTW I'm using DNS instead of IP... ups... bloody me!
I didn't thought that before because I also used the IP, but!!!
Of course, I have several VirtualHost on the same development PC and never worried about Apache's warning because they all work fine.
[warn] VirtualHost drupal6site:80 overlaps with VirtualHost drupal5site:80, the first has precedence, perhaps you need a NameVirtualHost directiveOf course, Drupal 5 was preferred!
I had them all under the same IP, looking through DNS forcing Apache to figure it out based on the requested domain name!
now
$ sudo a2dissite drupal5siteand the drupal6site runs fast the same as Drupal 5 use to.
Well, I hope my stupidity serve as a precedent at least.
I'll fix that NameVirtualHost directive finally.
Now I remember...
Now I remember why I let that warning going on.
I develop in Debian, but testing and production are Ubuntu
Now, to suppress the warning I have to use NameVirtualHost directive, but setting it provokes other warning because of the hostname
All the time I have this warning on Debian when restarting Apache
Could not reliably determine the server's fully qualified domain name, using #.#.#.# for ServerNamethis warning is fixed in Ubuntu by ensuring that
hostname --fqdnreturns the correct PC's qualified domain nameSo, set up
/etc/hostswith the qualified name first, etc, etc, and check it out withhostname -fqdnIn Ubuntu that's fine, but in Debian is not enough and that keeps me away from fix the former warning.
Until now I didn't realize that some sites are slower than others, maybe because I used other combination of configurations, (the current Apache is fresh new)
So, if somebody knows what to do to make it work in Debian I'll appreciate it.
Apache2 I sense. I take it
Apache2 I sense.
I take it you have ServerName drupal6site in drupal6site.conf and ServerName drupal5site in drupal5site.conf
Do you also have ServerName "YourServerName" in apache2.conf ?
HillsWeb.com
Done already
it's done already, thanks.
Nevertheless my Apache (even without warnings) has some mornings and some other mornings...
Interesting performance
Interesting performance issue, DNS... I have to check this too, as my site seems to take longer to load with them than without.
Shared hosting?
It's a shared hosting with several VirtualHosts?
Each site has it's own IP or they are under the same IP with different DNS?
In my development environment it's the same IP for every VirtualHost, because instead of having 127.0.0.1, 127.0.0.2, etc, I use my LAN IP for every site I'm testing or developing so my peers can play around too. Then, the only way to difference one VH from the others is with DNS.
That's what I think should be causing this erratic performance behavior... (but not quite sure)
Also thinks 6.3 is slow
I´m testing 6.3 now. On a totally clean site. And it is very slow. My site that is in 5.9 is so much faster and that is a site with a rather large database and that has been uppgraded a number of times by now. The site with 6.3 is almost empty - and still SO slow. The environment is exaktly the same for both sites as well. So you're not the only one with this problem. Upgrading to release 6 will have to wait.
Cache and Menu
I've been looking.. well it seems like must of the penalties come from cache and menu queries.
I've cache disabled, though the menu system still does it's own.
And there seems to be a lot of waste creating/verifying/updating cache when they are being recreated again.. I really haven't go deep.. but it sounds to me like the throttle module needing a percent to stop checking when it has to go on or off..
By the way, note that the
By the way, note that the throttle module is going to be removed from Drupal 7.x as rather useless (http://drupal.org/node/245504).
Also, block caching which has been introduced in 6.x has a somehow complicated conditional behavior as mentioned in the admin/settings/performance page (depending on whether page caching is also enabled and whether there is any access control)
I switched over to drupal 6
I switched over to drupal 6 (took the plunge), it does have some increased benefits not as much as it was hyped up to be, but I switched because of the benefits.
You can do things a little bit faster and if it speeds me up a few seconds more, then it's worth it.
Definitely the cache thing can be annoying seems to slow things down ( admin side ), however the user side seems to be fine, performance wise. I also notice a drupal install with no extra modules installed is blazingly fast, good to know.
I think drupal should remove all css from modules, there's no need to have them since the theme should take care of that, it's a nuisance, so say we all (97% say get rid of it).
In moving to drupal 6, I had to make do with other modules to replace the ones that were not updated to 6, for the most part after scouring the module directory I found enough to make it worth the upgrade.
I think drupal should step outside the box and do someting bold, try to be a complete cms with 20 modules or less, without ever having to need anything more. The views module has some potential in this area, if a user could simply custom build anything they wanted and apply it anyway they wanted what a tool that would be.
The drupal 6 views rocks and is easy to use. Has anyone tried to created an all views website with no other modules ?
No modules still slow
My Drupal 6.3 installation is absolutely clean, no modules, almost nothing in the database and it is NOT fast. And the environment is exactly the same as 5.9. So you're lucky getting it that fast.
really ? what are you using
really ? what are you using PC ?
No I have my sites in a
No I have my sites in a webhotel. That's why can say they are all treated the same way.