One highly debated issue, and frequently asked question that I see, is "Should I install an OPCode cacher?"  It's common knowledge that OPCode cachers can speed up complex applications significantly.  What's debated, is the best one to use and what the difference is between them.  So, that's what this benchmark session is for.  To tell the difference between the OPCode Caches.

Well, I've often been asked a number of questions about PageCache.  Some of them include questions such as  "How much does it help?", "What's the best storage method?", and "Which is faster, 2.0 or 1.0?".  Well, I've put those questions to the test.  In this latest round of benchmarks, I test PageCache with Joomla 1.0.14...

Well, while browsing the Joomla performance forum, I've been noticing quite a few people asking if Joomla can be fast.  Well, I've decided to do a series of performance benchmarks agains Joomla 1.5.1 to see how it stacks up.  In this artilcle, I will compare Joomla 1.0, 1.5 RC1, 1.5 RC3, and 1.5.1 with each other in a series of different test scenarios.  I'm posting the raw (graphed) output, and will let you draw your own conclusions from it. 

Note, I am also presently working on future benchmarks comparing different methods to "speed" up Joomla 1.5.1, ranging from the different session backends, to a full blown load balanced cluster.  Keep tuned here, as I will post results as I get them. 

I've been a strong proponent of Lighttpd over Apache for some time.  While doing some benchmarks on Joomla 1.5 (and PageCache) to be displayed later.  I noticed a quite interesting relationship between Apache and Lighttpd's results.  I did every test multiple times because I was honestly shocked by the difference.  So, enough with the intro, on to the test...