Jump to content



Member Since 22 Sep 2010
Offline Last Active Jun 30 2016 12:33 AM

#246964 Presenting A Lightning-Fast And Enduring Cs-Cart Demo With 200,000 Products

Posted by e-carter on 01 April 2016 - 05:09 AM

Note that demo.cs-cart.com has very few products and the whole data set is pretty useless for establishing any kind of load test.

Cannot argue on this. It is real trap for those who starts with the hope on bаrе Fortune.

Regarding to cloud vs dedicated server, i see what is your point about devoted RAM but then if we worry about sustained load not bursts, it is just empirical evaluation not what this demo is all about.

I need to see the improvement from cs-cart to the updated cs-cart, well, loaded with same 'pretty useless' data load. If this improvement is essential then you have more space to manage sustained load too.

Again, sustained load may be handled more effectively with Nginx and nightworming FPC than with pricey hardware.



If you have a dedicated server (not cloud) you want to give me with 64GB of memory for $44/month, I'm all ears.

- Dedicated root server: https://www.hetzner....server/ex41sssd

#246757 Presenting A Lightning-Fast And Enduring Cs-Cart Demo With 200,000 Products

Posted by e-carter on 29 March 2016 - 11:50 PM

Providing results for cs-cart customers when using dedicated servers with 64GB memory configurations is in fact unrealistic.  Pay $400 for software and spend $500+/month for a server to run it?


I have clients that run 225K products in V3.0.4 cs-cart with 12GB memory and a few cpu's.  So 100K products isn't really a big deal


Anything will run fast if you cache it all in memory (like the old SHM caching method used in V3) and then have the DB cached in memory as well.  That's not rocket science and says nothing about the software itself but rather what you can spend to host it.


Now you're getting silly in your response.  Find me a host that runs atom processors on a server.  We all know that different cpus have different core counts and different clock speeds and different internal caches (all of which make a huge difference).  My point was to show performance across a scaling of HW configurations as well as product/site configs.


And don't forget the software variants that impact performance as well.  Things like number of cart promotions, product features, product comparisons, etc.


My point is that your configuration and results is not relevant to 99.9% of your customers.  Great news for you internally as it relates to Merchium but not relevant at all to your bread and butter customers.  You know, they guys who pay your bills/salaries.


You've effectively shown one data point that is irrelevant to the vast majority of your customers.  My request was simply to provide performance/configuration info that might help 99% of your customers versus 0.01%.


Why you are so sure? I wouldn't be. The Atom cores are offered in USA. Yes it is tricky business but USA is USA. In contrast, the mentioned server in Nuremberg, Germany is 44USD for 64GB RAM, 2 SSD's, very last i7 CPU.

If you pay $$$ for similar spec in USA, it is not only others problem. You need be more critical about your own numbers like 99.9% or 500+/month.

If you try then you may see same thing differently. Thus the demo cart is installed on $44 server (+VAT). :)


But yes, i do support the idea to provide the tests with Varnish on newer engines like nginx, percona,..

Nginx would make more difference than extra cores and Gigs of RAM when used with FPC'd (static) content.