• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Litespeed Cache?

AzzidReign

Well-known member
#1
So today I was roaming through some of the things that Litespeedtech offers and came across this:


It says vB and IPB, has anyone tried it for either of those? And has anyone tried it for xF? Is this not something a sysadmin could set up (sorry for my ignorance, I've hired sysadmins so I don't have to deal with the server headaches)?
 

Alfa1

Well-known member
#2
I'm about to try LiteSpeed for vbulletin. Yes, a sysadmin should be able to install it. Litespeed goes on top of Apache. AFAIK there is no Litespeed cache for XenForo yet. I really hope they will add it.
 

Forsaken

Well-known member
#3
I'm about to try LiteSpeed for vbulletin. Yes, a sysadmin should be able to install it. Litespeed goes on top of Apache. AFAIK there is no Litespeed cache for XenForo yet. I really hope they will add it.
The only thing LiteSpeed has to do with Apache is its ability to convert/use Apache config files. It is completely separate from Apache.
 

Alfa1

Well-known member
#8
Here is George his comparison between Varnish and Litespeed cache: http://www.litespeedtech.com/support/forum/showthread.php?t=4603
Eva2000 said:
Litespeed using inbuilt cache feature was the overall winner though with a comfortable lead. Litespeed + inbuilt cache was 4x times faster than Litespeed with no cache at 200 concurrency level and 4.5x times faster at 1000 concurrency level. Litespeed + inbuilt cache was up to 1.6x to 1.9x times faster than Apache + Varnish at concurrency levels 200 all the way up to 1000.
Even though this relates to vbulletin, it does indicate that LiteSpeed cache would be very nice to have for XF.
 

a legacy reborn

Well-known member
#9
Here is George his comparison between Varnish and Litespeed cache: http://www.litespeedtech.com/support/forum/showthread.php?t=4603

Even though this relates to vbulletin, it does indicate that LiteSpeed cache would be very nice to have for XF.
I have read several different comparisons between the two and it was usually Varnish + Apache > Litespeed Cache...although this article seems to be well composed so I might have a second look at it.
 

Forsaken

Well-known member
#10
I have read several different comparisons between the two and it was usually Varnish + Apache > Litespeed Cache...although this article seems to be well composed so I might have a second look at it.
Uh... Where would you have seen that? Apache isn't even comparable to LiteSpeed if their tests were done correctly (vanilla installs and nothing to optimize them other than Varnish/LiteSpeed Cache).
 

Ghan_04

Active member
#16
I would like to see if Litespeed cache is worth it as well. I have Xenforo running with the free version of Litespeed, XCache, and Memcached as a back-end cache here: http://www.waywardinn.com/forum/
It's pretty fast - no complaints here. But I am always curious to see how much better it might perform. :)
 

dihuta

Formerly Dinh Thanh
#17
Varnish/Litespeed cache used to cache guest requests. They cache entire pages and response to requests without execute php. Extremely useful for home, index pages & busy sites.
 

RoldanLT

Well-known member
#19
So today I was roaming through some of the things that Litespeedtech offers and came across this:


It says vB and IPB, has anyone tried it for either of those? And has anyone tried it for xF? Is this not something a sysadmin could set up (sorry for my ignorance, I've hired sysadmins so I don't have to deal with the server headaches)?
Did you manage to implement cache under litespeed?