which one is better?

[Glen Lumanau]

        location ~ \.php$ {
            fastcgi_pass   127.0.0.1:9000;
            fastcgi_param  SCRIPT_FILENAME
/home/myhome/web$fastcgi_script_name;
            fastcgi_index  index.php;
            fastcgi_cache                   one;
            fastcgi_cache_key               127.0.0.1:9000$request_uri;
            fastcgi_cache_valid             200  1h;
            include /etc/nginx/fastcgi_params;
        }

It seems that the /data/nginx/cache directory now have some files :D

So that the location which is go to @joomla will be cached aswell?


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nginx at sysoev.ru [mailto:owner-nginx at sysoev.ru] On Behalf Of Igor
Sysoev
Sent: 21 April 2009 18:00
To: nginx at sysoev.ru
Subject: Re: which one is better?

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 05:49:24PM +0700, Glen Lumanau wrote:

> Please check http://pastebin.com/d448b8b03
> 
> I've uploaded the livehttpheaders

At least

http://www.kompas-tv.com/modules/mod_smo_ajax_shoutbox_css.php

should be cacheable. Probably it is handled by not @joomla, but by
something like location ~ "\.php$".

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nginx at sysoev.ru [mailto:owner-nginx at sysoev.ru] On Behalf Of
Igor
> Sysoev
> Sent: 21 April 2009 17:32
> To: nginx at sysoev.ru
> Subject: Re: which one is better?
> 
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 04:02:57PM +0700, Glen Lumanau wrote:
> 
> > How do i check that? Becase i'm using default configuration
> 
> If you use Firefox:
> http://livehttpheaders.mozdev.org
> 
> Could you create debug log ?
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-nginx at sysoev.ru [mailto:owner-nginx at sysoev.ru] On Behalf Of
> Igor
> > Sysoev
> > Sent: 21 April 2009 15:54
> > To: nginx at sysoev.ru
> > Subject: Re: which one is better?
> > 
> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 03:44:28PM +0700, Glen Lumanau wrote:
> > 
> > > I already tried this
> > > 
> > > Here's the config
> > > 
> > >     fastcgi_cache_path  /data/nginx/cache  levels=1:2
keys_zone=one:10m
> > > inactive=7d  max_size=200m;
> > >     fastcgi_temp_path   /data/nginx/temp;
> > > 
> > >         location @joomla {
> > >             fastcgi_pass   127.0.0.1:9000;
> > >             fastcgi_param  SCRIPT_FILENAME
> /home/kompastv/web/index.php;
> > >             fastcgi_cache                   one;
> > >             fastcgi_cache_key
127.0.0.1:9000$request_uri;
> > >             fastcgi_cache_valid             200  1h;
> > > 
> > > /data/nginx/cache and /data/nginx/temp is still empty
> > > 
> > > root     28119  0.0  0.0  13940   496 ?        Ss   15:41   0:00
nginx:
> > > master process /etc/nginxnew/sbin/nginx -c /etc/nginx/nginx.conf
> > > nginx	   28120  1.3  0.2  17328  4408 ?        R    15:41   0:01
> nginx:
> > > worker process
> > > nginx    28122  1.6  0.2  17384  4540 ?        S    15:41   0:01
nginx:
> > > worker process
> > > nginx    28123  0.0  0.0  14096   800 ?        S    15:41   0:00
nginx:
> > > cache manager process
> > > 
> > > is there somethink i've missed?
> > 
> > Does fastcgi return Expires or Cache-Control headers which may forbid
> > caching ?
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-nginx at sysoev.ru [mailto:owner-nginx at sysoev.ru] On Behalf
Of
> > Igor
> > > Sysoev
> > > Sent: 21 April 2009 15:32
> > > To: nginx at sysoev.ru
> > > Subject: Re: which one is better?
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 03:10:31PM +0700, Glen Lumanau wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Is there any help page regarding fastcgi_cache? Or it's the same
> format
> > as
> > > > proxy_cache?
> > > 
> > > Yes, just s/proxy/fastcgi/.
> > > 
> > > The single difference is that fastcgi cache requires
> > > 
> > >       fastcgi_cache_key   localhost:9000$request_uri;
> > > 
> > > while proxy_cache may use default one, similar to this:
> > > 
> > > proxy_cache_key  $scheme$proxy_host$uri$is_args$args;
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-nginx at sysoev.ru [mailto:owner-nginx at sysoev.ru] On Behalf
> Of
> > > Igor
> > > > Sysoev
> > > > Sent: 21 April 2009 14:41
> > > > To: nginx at sysoev.ru
> > > > Subject: Re: which one is better?
> > > > 
> > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 01:20:05PM +0700, Glen Lumanau wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > I still wonder which one is better for performance
> > > > > 
> > > > > Pure nginx + php-fpm
> > > > > 
> > > > > Or
> > > > > 
> > > > > Nginx + apache2 + proxy_cache
> > > > > 
> > > > > Anybody knows about this?
> > > > 
> > > > Can not say about apache2 vs php-fpm, but you can use fastcgi_cache
> too.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > -- 
> > > > Igor Sysoev
> > > > http://sysoev.ru/en/
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Igor Sysoev
> > > http://sysoev.ru/en/
> > > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Igor Sysoev
> > http://sysoev.ru/en/
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Igor Sysoev
> http://sysoev.ru/en/
> 

-- 
Igor Sysoev
http://sysoev.ru/en/