SOLVED Performance issues on catalyst
-
-
- Andy Miller
- Preeminent Rocketeer
- Posts: 9919
- Thanks: 96
- Web Kahuna
-
Not sure what you mean by #7. Reduced the images in firefox? You mean fireworks? We exported the images in fireworks, so i would be genuinely interested in your process of exporting them smaller.
Cheers.
Alcides Fialho wrote:As I told you, light changes.....
These where the steps.
1 - Enabled cache via joomla admin
2 - Activated GZIP compression
3 - Added compression to the CSS and JS files (it reduced 50% my CSS) - forum.mamboserver.com/showthread.php?t=45391
4 - Added some indexes to the main tables in Joomla www.joomlaperformance.com/articles/perfo...as_queries_4_14.html
(here I made some changes, since this query is for J 1.0* and I have 1.5.3)
5 - installed http://xcache.lighttpd.net/ in my web server - this made my pages load 55% faster
6 - Took out from home page the header module (where you had the promo.png file - 136k )
7 - Reduced all the png files using firefox - reduced in total 93k
So as you can see nothing too much complicated.......since i'm not a programmer.......
-
-
-
- Alcides Fialho
- Newbie
- Posts: 8
- Thanks: 0
-
Yes off course I've could've implemented this in any template......that's not the point.......the point is
With rhuk milky-way load time 7.170362 seconds, with catalyst 24.799293 seconds
Here we are only speaking of a heavy template.....could've been any other template....
Sorry....fireworks.....PNG 8 - reduced colours to excat and some reduced even more....some of them changed to JPG at 70% quality (those who dind't need transparency features)...... - Last Edit: 16 years 5 months ago by Alcides Fialho.
-
-
-
- Alcides Fialho
- Newbie
- Posts: 8
- Thanks: 0
-
Nevertheless guys......please......I'm not trying to find issues on the template.......I'm just reporting you the tweaks (in the template and in joomla) I've made......so that other persons who had this problem, could try to implement it also......
-
-
-
- Terp
- Elite Rocketeer
- Posts: 1720
- Thanks: 23
-
Alcides Fialho wrote:
Yes off course I've could've implemented this in any template......that's not the point.......the point is
With rhuk milky-way load time 7.170362 seconds, with catalyst 24.799293 seconds
You mean 8 seconds after you took care of http compression and caching.
How about running the two side-by-side now with all the compression measures you implemented? I would argue that the tradeoffs are justified, as there is more than 3x the horsepower using Catalyst over Milky-way.
I am not trying to be faceious, but interested in how much of this was the template versus the hosting and graphics and perhaps looking at all your changes for my site(s)...haven't compressed the css or js as of yet, not using gzip as of yet, either, so I, too could have tremendous gains I suspect.
I saw a post once that listed the stock installs of the various RT templates and the standard defaults...something like this might be helpful to post for those concerned with load times, given many of us are...a page with all the templates and the rankings...hive and the more clean, simple templates gravitated toward the top, of course, and medimogul and some of the other top-heavy tempates toward the bottom...would be one more thing people can consider when deciding on a template.
-
-
-
- Terp
- Elite Rocketeer
- Posts: 1720
- Thanks: 23
-
Alcides Fialho wrote:
Nevertheless guys......please......I'm not trying to find issues on the template.......I'm just reporting you the tweaks (in the template and in joomla) I've made......so that other persons who had this problem, could try to implement it also......
I'm with you...perhaps a new sticky even with the things one can do to reduce overhead for these templates might be order...amazing difference realized with just a few changes, as you have demonstrated. Good stuff.
-
-
-
- Alcides Fialho
- Newbie
- Posts: 8
- Thanks: 0
-
Yap...thats the point !!
You know.....as I'm not a programmer ( I would say I'm learning on my own costs ) It's difficult to me to improve coding....I would not dare to raise questions on this issue.....
But being a customer of Rocket theme and trying to improove performance....since in our days (from Oreilly's known statistics.....) If a person has to wait more than 15 secs.....for a page to be loaded they will go away before getting in............these where my tweaks.....hope that other people or/and even Rocket theme team can share more ways on this improovement !
-
-
-
What about hardcoding the index.php instead of the site determining which style, font, menu etc has been set in the admin. This must use up a few valuable seconds. No need for the params.ini then.
Just a suggestion. Gonna try it when I get a spare minute, unless someone posts a reason why not to on this here forum.
-
Time to create page: 0.046 seconds