Support the ongoing development of Laravel.io →
Configuration Requests
Last updated 6 months ago.
0

browsers make no more than 2 connections in parallel. so 2 images are being downloaded at the same time if the first 2 requests are taking long time to finish the 3rd and the 4th will take time to start.

Are you re-sizing the images on the fly? how about caching them? also how about getting images of size you need for that page. example: for thumbs view page request only 100px X 100px images not the whole thing.

0

astroanu said:

browsers make no more than 2 connections in parallel. so 2 images are being downloaded at the same time if the first 2 requests are taking long time to finish the 3rd and the 4th will take time to start.

You have a point although modern browsers seem to open more connections in parallel. Firefox 3+ has a limit of 6 connections which could explain the "steps" pattern with the timing of the first 6 images. But why does it stay at 450ms afterwards? Shouldn't the pattern of the first 6 images repeat? Else it would suggest that the 450ms response time is caused by all 6 connections being open.

Are you re-sizing the images on the fly? how about caching them? also how about getting images of size you need for that page. example: for thumbs view page request only 100px X 100px images not the whole thing.

I'm not altering the images, only checking for user permissions. The images are already resized thumbnails but are not cached in any way. As I said, the timings stay the same even if I don't do anything in the image controller (neither loading the image nor returning it) so it should be a "global" performance issue with lots of requests (of the same client?) at the same time.

Last updated 7 years ago.
0

Mostly looking at running your images through a optimizer and then using a front end cache to server the images.

Some fine tuning of nginx or varnish should get you into the lower segment of loading .

0

If you think there's a hidden bug in your code that hinders the performance i suggest you use a bench marking tool such as Xdebug.

0

astroanu said:

If you think there's a hidden bug in your code that hinders the performance i suggest you use a bench marking tool such as Xdebug.

I don't think there is a bug, really, only some performance bottleneck. Ultimately the bottleneck may be the hardware or the caching but I'd like to optimize the code first.

Profiling a single image request with Xdebug, I get an output like this in KCachegrind. Most of the time seems to be spent on internal Laravel stuff but looking at the callee map there seems to be a repetition of these two large blocks. Maybe one of them can be avoided but I can't really figure out what all of it means...

0

Sign in to participate in this thread!

LaraJobs

Your banner here too?

mzur mzur Joined 10 Feb 2015

Moderators

We'd like to thank these amazing companies for supporting us

Your logo here?

Laravel.io

The Laravel portal for problem solving, knowledge sharing and community building.

© 2022 Laravel.io - All rights reserved.