Copied to clipboard

Flag this post as spam?

This post will be reported to the moderators as potential spam to be looked at


  • Alex Kørup 17 posts 39 karma points
    Jan 28, 2013 @ 09:07
    Alex Kørup
    0

    Performance in Umbraco Admin

    Hi,

    I'm running a site (Umbraco version 4.7.1.1) having around a total of 1500-2000 nodes. Frontend is performing well. But my client is tearing out hairs because of low performance on the backend/admin.

    Expanding a folder containing page-type nodes, is slow but not a show stopper. But if the content of the folder is subfolders the performance sucks. Expanding a folder with 20 subfolders takes around 20-24- seconds(!).

    Saving and publishing a normal text-page with a total of 8 fields (3 of them Rich Text fields) takes arorund 25 seconds. :(

    This is experienced across browsers. The site is running in a hosted environment.

    Can I do anything to speed up performance?

    Will upgrading to 4.11 help? Or what about v6.0 which is promised to include performance improvements...?

    Any ideas, advise? Thanks.

    /Alex

  • Dan 1285 posts 3917 karma points c-trib
    Jan 28, 2013 @ 10:14
    Dan
    0

    Hi Alex,

    What database are you using?

  • Alex Kørup 17 posts 39 karma points
    Jan 28, 2013 @ 19:29
    Alex Kørup
    0

    SQL Server 2008 Express

    The site is relative small, and I don't expect the size of the data to exceed the 10GB limitation anyway...

  • Jan Skovgaard 11280 posts 23678 karma points MVP 10x admin c-trib
    Jan 28, 2013 @ 19:42
    Jan Skovgaard
    0

    Hi Alex

    That sounds weird...

    What are the server specs? CPU speed, RAM, OS etc.

    Is the hosted environment a dedicated server where no other sites are running?

    Are you using any custom user controls as datatypes in the backoffice? Or other such things?

    /Jan

  • Jan Skovgaard 11280 posts 23678 karma points MVP 10x admin c-trib
    Jan 28, 2013 @ 19:43
    Jan Skovgaard
    0

    ...And are there perhaps some usefull information in the umbracoLog table? Or on the event viewer on the server?

    /Jan

  • Alex Kørup 17 posts 39 karma points
    Jan 28, 2013 @ 20:01
    Alex Kørup
    0

    It is a hosted environment, running multiple other websites. I have requested the server specs from the supplier. The sites has no custom user controls.

    The alternative is of cause a dedicated server, but since the site is relatively small, I (ie my client) would prefer to keep the costs down...

    /Alex

  • Jan Skovgaard 11280 posts 23678 karma points MVP 10x admin c-trib
    Jan 28, 2013 @ 21:10
    Jan Skovgaard
    0

    Ok, shared hosting. That should usually not be a problem for such a small site..

    I'm wondering if someting perhaps have been misconfigured somehow...but currently can't think of what it should be. Looking forward to receive further info.

    /Jan

     

  • Alex Kørup 17 posts 39 karma points
    Jan 28, 2013 @ 21:22
    Alex Kørup
    0

    I installed the Log Manager, and don't see a single error when doing a search in the log. Only events like open, save and publish on the nodes...

  • Dan 1285 posts 3917 karma points c-trib
    Jan 29, 2013 @ 08:55
    Dan
    0

    Hi Alex,

    It does sound pretty unusual, but then it depends on the resources allocated by the host.  I've had one occasion whereby a client site was taken down by a shared hosting provider for "overuse" of processor resources - even though it was a very small (<50 page) bog-standard and relatively inactive Umbraco website.  So I'm not entirely surprised - particularly if you're talking thousands of nodes.  You may find that other shared hosting providers are able to cope with it fine.

    A couple of things you could try would be to install the FALM housekeeping package to analyse and delete your logs and/or version history.  I've found that deleting logs and versions can improve database performance noticeably.

    The other thing might be to try upgrading to v6 once it's released - a bit of a scary move but as far as I know a lot of the core has been optimised and it's billed as being "much faster" than 4.x.

    Hope this at least gives you some useful avenues to explore...

  • Alex Kørup 17 posts 39 karma points
    Jan 29, 2013 @ 10:35
    Alex Kørup
    0

    I'm twisting the arms of my hosting provider for details about the environment. They currently just recommend buying their SQL Server 2008 database product (both website and database still running in shared aka crowded environments).

    FALM Housekeeping will not run on other than SQL Server 2005/2008 it seems!? I get an Keyword not supported: 'datalayer'. error... A known issue as I read other posts... :´(

    Maybe upgrading is inevitable...

    /Alex

  • Dan 1285 posts 3917 karma points c-trib
    Jan 29, 2013 @ 10:43
    Dan
    0

    Hmm, I run lots of sites on SQL 2008 Express and have used FALM Housekeeping without any issues.

    Actually, I've just read your post over on the package board and your connection string suggests you're using SQL CE, not SQL 2008 Express.  Could you clarify?  If you're using SQL CE then FALM Housekeeping won't work and also that will be the route of your performance problems.  SQL CE is really poor in terms of back-office performance compared to SQL Server (/Express).

    There is a very good tool for migrating from SQL CE to SQL Server though: http://sqlcetoolbox.codeplex.com/.  Lee Kelleher also packaged this up so you can run it through the back-office but really the stand-along package will work nicely.

  • Alex Kørup 17 posts 39 karma points
    Jan 29, 2013 @ 10:51
    Alex Kørup
    0

    Ears are turning red here... I don't know why I messed up Express with Compact Edition. I run on a CE alright... And checking the comparison chart I see that the CE runs entirely in-process with the app. The CE is nice for starters i guess, but apparently not for a site with a page count growing past 1000...

    I'll upgrade first the DB, and hold my horses on the v6. ;)

    Thanks!

  • Dan 1285 posts 3917 karma points c-trib
    Jan 29, 2013 @ 10:57
    Dan
    0

    Yeah - it's a limitation that doesn't seem to be well known, considering SQL CE is the default database during the Umbraco installation.  Firstly, it's a dog in terms of performance, and gets noticably worse over time.  Secondly when it increases in file size it becomes very difficult to administer (e.g. some tools such as Webmatrix and Management Studio Express I think will not even open SQL CE databases greater than 256Mb).  So yes, develop on CE - it's quick and easy, but (having been there and been bitten) I wouldn't ever use it in production.  That migration tool I linked to is fantastic though - it's about the only thing I've found that will reliably convert CE to SQL Server, even with huge data sets.

    Please let us know if the SQL Server upgrade makes a massive difference to your back-office performance - I suspect it will :)

  • Alex Kørup 17 posts 39 karma points
    Jan 30, 2013 @ 19:02
    Alex Kørup
    1

    Wow. Discovered a massive .sdf file on the server (500MB), obviously oversized considered the purpose of SQL CE. I migrated the database using the ExportSqlCe40.exe tool to an SQL Server 2008 (hosted and shared environment at Unoeuro.com). The scripting tool worked fast and like a charm. The scripted database occupied 24 sql files which I scheduled to run at night time. Due to an unexpected connection error the chain of scripts broke down, which gave me some manual work rerunning some of the scripts, removing some duplicates and such. But in the end it got migrated. Hooking the Umbraco up to the new database was easy, just changing the 'umbracoDbDSN' property in web.config.

    The result:

    • Expanding folders (with 20-25 subfolders) improved from approx 20 seconds to 1 second!
    • Saving and Publish went from approx 20-25 seconds to 1-2 seconds!
    • General feeling in the backoffice is much better
    • We weren't experiencing any major performance issues on the frontend, but surely the update makes it more robust as traffic increases...
    • The only known issue on our frontend is the use of XSLTSearch, which is beginning to slow now we've passed 1000 nodes. Searching currently takes 2 seconds. Upgrading the DB of cause had no effect on this.
    Thanks for your posts and ideas! :)
Please Sign in or register to post replies

Write your reply to:

Draft