Comments on: FeedLounge slow this week http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/ FeedLounge is a state of the art web-based feed reader. Tue, 07 Oct 2008 22:50:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4-beta by: Software Development Guide http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-65484 Wed, 07 Nov 2007 21:25:11 +0000 http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-65484 <strong>Software Development Guide</strong> I couldn't understand some parts of this article, but it sounds interesting Software Development Guide

I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but it sounds interesting

]]> by: dotnot http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-281 Fri, 02 Sep 2005 16:10:11 +0000 http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-281 <strong>FeedLounge Migration, part duex</strong> I am heading home today, and will return home late tonight to begin the second FeedLounge migration. Seems that we just did this last week, but it was actually almost 2 months ago. Wow. The first migration was such a smashing success that we are go... FeedLounge Migration, part duex

I am heading home today, and will return home late tonight to begin the second FeedLounge migration. Seems that we just did this last week, but it was actually almost 2 months ago. Wow.
The first migration was such a smashing success that we are go…

]]> by: Alex http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-275 Tue, 30 Aug 2005 15:36:09 +0000 http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-275 The primary problem is that most databases are tuned to handle a write-heavy application (data entry) or a read-heavy application (like a Wikipedia). On the surface a web-based feed reader may seem like a read-heavy application, but it's actually <em>both</em> write and read heavy. Just for fun, run some numbers on your own regarding feed refreshing. Say you have 200 users, each subscribed to an average of 50 unique feeds, and you refresh those every hour. That is 10000 feeds in 60 minutes (7200 seconds). Some portion of those feeds will return a 304 response, but just as many will be formatted in such a way that you have to compare the items using a checksum instead of relying on their GUID. Your database has to be able to retrieve the current feed data for the feed that is stored in the database, compare that to what has been downloaded, and add new items to the database - in a very short time (< 1 second). All the while, users want to be able to quickly go through the web interface as they browse through their feed list. The primary problem is that most databases are tuned to handle a write-heavy application (data entry) or a read-heavy application (like a Wikipedia). On the surface a web-based feed reader may seem like a read-heavy application, but it’s actually both write and read heavy.

Just for fun, run some numbers on your own regarding feed refreshing. Say you have 200 users, each subscribed to an average of 50 unique feeds, and you refresh those every hour. That is 10000 feeds in 60 minutes (7200 seconds).

Some portion of those feeds will return a 304 response, but just as many will be formatted in such a way that you have to compare the items using a checksum instead of relying on their GUID. Your database has to be able to retrieve the current feed data for the feed that is stored in the database, compare that to what has been downloaded, and add new items to the database - in a very short time (< 1 second).

All the while, users want to be able to quickly go through the web interface as they browse through their feed list.

]]> by: KO http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-274 Tue, 30 Aug 2005 07:39:03 +0000 http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-274 Wikipedia uses MySQL, and seems to do just fine. Wikipedia uses MySQL, and seems to do just fine.

]]> by: Andrei Maxim http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-267 Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:32:53 +0000 http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-267 Yes, they are expensive, but looking at the SQL Server performance and pricing, it might be a viable solution. One think that got me going on SQL Server is the Execution Plan, that tells you every single instruction/procedure it ran and how long it took, helping you pin-point performance issues. A small disclaimer: I have some small experience with Microsoft's database server and, so far, it delivers. Yes, they are expensive, but looking at the SQL Server performance and pricing, it might be a viable solution.

One think that got me going on SQL Server is the Execution Plan, that tells you every single instruction/procedure it ran and how long it took, helping you pin-point performance issues.

A small disclaimer: I have some small experience with Microsoft’s database server and, so far, it delivers.

]]> by: pablotossi http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-264 Thu, 25 Aug 2005 15:11:34 +0000 http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-264 ...i am waiting my alpha-beta tester ticket!!!! please remember me!!! …i am waiting my alpha-beta tester ticket!!!! please remember me!!!

]]> by: Alex http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-263 Thu, 25 Aug 2005 14:43:47 +0000 http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-263 We're looking at a wide variety of alternatives. However, the pricing of some of these databases is rather prohibitive. We’re looking at a wide variety of alternatives. However, the pricing of some of these databases is rather prohibitive.

]]> by: Andrei Maxim http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-262 Thu, 25 Aug 2005 09:02:18 +0000 http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-262 I don't have any experience with MySQL whatsoever, but I've heard quite a lot of people talking about how MySQL doesn't really scale and that it should be used only for a small database, like a blog or forum, not something so dynamic as FeedLounge is supposed to be. Have you ever considered other database servers, like Oracle or SQL Server? Several independent tests show that Oracle is the fastest while SQL Server has the best price/performance. Considering you only have a couple of hundreds of readers and that you want to provide Feedlounge as a paid service, maybe other platforms are worth a look. And now, while you are upgrading you server, might be just the right time. I don’t have any experience with MySQL whatsoever, but I’ve heard quite a lot of people talking about how MySQL doesn’t really scale and that it should be used only for a small database, like a blog or forum, not something so dynamic as FeedLounge is supposed to be.

Have you ever considered other database servers, like Oracle or SQL Server? Several independent tests show that Oracle is the fastest while SQL Server has the best price/performance.

Considering you only have a couple of hundreds of readers and that you want to provide Feedlounge as a paid service, maybe other platforms are worth a look. And now, while you are upgrading you server, might be just the right time.

]]> by: FeedLounge http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-253 Sun, 14 Aug 2005 20:46:24 +0000 http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-253 <strong>Database Testing Continues</strong> We’re continuing to test various solutions for the database scale issues we’ve run into. I’ve talked to a couple other developers in this space and they’ve been chuckling and nodding as they read through our previous post (havi... Database Testing Continues

We’re continuing to test various solutions for the database scale issues we’ve run into. I’ve talked to a couple other developers in this space and they’ve been chuckling and nodding as they read through our previous post (havi…

]]> by: Dan Cameron http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-246 Thu, 11 Aug 2005 20:11:49 +0000 http://feedlounge.com/blog/2005/08/10/slow/#comment-246 I had to go back to feeddemon and netnews because, for now, it's just unusable. It has been trying to load my unread feeds for the last 20 minutes and there are only 60. I can't wait till everything is resolved, either by new hardware or new backend. Please keep us posted. I had to go back to feeddemon and netnews because, for now, it’s just unusable. It has been trying to load my unread feeds for the last 20 minutes and there are only 60.

I can’t wait till everything is resolved, either by new hardware or new backend.

Please keep us posted.

]]>