[wp-hackers] suggestions for the next (not immediate)release
Amit Gupta
wp at igeek.info
Wed Aug 10 20:24:26 GMT 2005
well, actually I'm not saying that it should be done at the expense of
features, & I'm certainly not saying that it should be done like
LightPress which is loads faster but support not more than half the
front end features, the plugins etc.
what I was driving at is having the best of both worlds. that we keep
the features & functionality & ease of WordPress and get some more
speed. or should I believe that the code can't be optimised(including
SQL) to make it a bit more fast than it is currently? perhaps Matt or
Ryan can shed some light on this.
I know speed has been one of the driving points right from the
beginning, but I think that I read some piece from Matt sometime back
that said something about the legacy code from b2 that can be improved a
bit or something to that effect. I don't know if its been done already
or not, so thought that I might as well ask about it.
I don't have any problems with WP-Cache2 so far, its serving quite well
on 1 blog that I'm using it on. Its just that I pointed it as an example
that a plugged in solution like that might not be as good as a built in
might be. Just a thought, nothing more, so I maybe wrong or I maybe
right. And I voiced some other people's thoughts on this as well, so
they weren't my own entirely.
------------
Amit Gupta
http://igeek.info/ || http://blog.igeek.info/
http://blog.igeek.info/wp-plugins/igsyntax-hiliter
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Deaton
To: wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 6:22 PM
Subject: Re: [wp-hackers] suggestions for the next (not
immediate)release
Sure, tons could be done, but then where would we be? We'd be where
lightpress is, tons faster, and tons of broken features. The WP Devs
have kept speed and lightweight in mind from the start, and at this
point without dropping features or filling the filesystem with files
for every function to make sure nothing is loaded where it isn't
needed, there isn't too much we can do for optimization.
On WP-Cache, saving multiple cache files is intentional, and is really
not that big of a deal. The solution is intended to save server load,
not harddisk space. It does not create more than one copy of the cache
file, it creates a cache file that very well may be unique to the user
that is logged in. Some sites have welcome greetings based on
username, the edit posts link like you said is based on username, and
various other little features that are only available when logged in
and are unique to each user. Caching these files too is perfectly
legitamate.
On 8/9/05, Amit Gupta <wp at igeek.info> wrote:
>
> I know WP-Cache2 is a server-side cacheing, but it indeed creates
more than
> 1 copy of a page in the cache. frankly I haven't investigated this
deeply
> due to lack of time, but 1 thing I can tell you is that if you are
logged in
> to WP, then it'll create a cache-file for you & 1 for someone who's
not
> logged in, so that you see the "edit post" links along with the post
> titles(if your theme has them). though this dual cache-file creation
is OK &
> not a problem, but I just mentioned it to tell you that it indeed
creates
> more than 1 copy of the cache-file!! ;)
>
> I think that more can be found out by doing some basic testing, I'll
do it
> if I get some free time any soon. Please don't take this part of my
> suggestion(multiple cache-file creation by WP-Cache2) entirely
seriously as
> I don't have any facts to back it up as I admit I haven't tested it
up, what
> I wrote is what some people who've tested told me. whether they are
right or
> wrong, I'm not 100% sure.
>
> but the WP-Cache2 issue put aside, I think even Matt & Ryan would
agree that
> a lot can be done to tighten up the WP Code & its speed can be
increased
> significantly!!
>
> ------------
> Amit Gupta
> http://igeek.info/ || http://blog.igeek.info/
> http://blog.igeek.info/wp-plugins/igsyntax-hiliter
--
--Robert Deaton
http://somethingunpredictable.com
_______________________________________________
wp-hackers mailing list
wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://comox.textdrive.com/pipermail/wp-hackers/attachments/20050810/762e9fb5/attachment-0001.html
More information about the wp-hackers
mailing list