Posts Tagged ‘origin server’

Why Web Measurements? Part I: Customer Generation

December 1st, 2008 by smp | Comments | Filed in GrabPERF, The Web, Web Performance, WebPerformance.Org

Introduction to the Series

This is the first of a four-part series focusing on the reasons why companies measure their Web performance. This perspective is substantially different than ones posited by others in the field as they focus on the meat and potatoes reasons, rather than the sometimes more difficult to imagine future effects that measurement will bring.

Reason One: Customer Generation

It is critical that a company be able to show that their Web services are superior to others, especially in the third-party services and delivery sectors of the Web. In this area, Web performance measurement is key to demonstrating the value and advantage of a service versus the option of self-delivering or using another competitor’s service.

Comparative benchmarking that clearly demonstrates the performance of each of the competitive services in the geographic regions that are of greatest interest to the prospect is key to these Web performance measurements. To achieve truly competitive benchmarks and prove the value of a service, measurements must be realistic and flexible.

In the CDN field, a one object fits all approach is no longer valid. CDNs are responsible for delivering not just images or static objects, but may also host an entire application on their edge servers, serving both HTTP and HTTPS content. In other cases, the application may not be hosted at the edge, but the edge server may act a s a proxy for the application, using advancing routing algorithms to deliver the visitor the requested dynamic content more quickly (in theory) than the origin server alone.

This complex range of services means that a CDN has to be willing to demonstrate effective and efficient service delivery before the sale is complete. A CDN has to be willing to expose their system not just to the backbone-based measurements offered in a traditional customer generation process, but to take measurements from the real-user perspective.

Ad-providers have to be willing to show that their service does not affect the overall performance of the site they are trying to place their content on. Web analytics firms face the same challenge. Web analytics firms have one advantage: if their object doesn’t load properly, it may not effect the visitor experience. However, neither ad-providers nor Web-analytics providers can hide frow Web measurement collection methods that show all of the bling and the blemishes.

Using Web performance measurements to generate customers is a way that a firm can clearly show that they have faith enough in their service to openly compare it to other providers and to the status quo.

But woe be the firm who uses Web performance metrics in a way that tries to show only their good side. Prospects become former prospects very quickly if a firm using Web performance data to generate new business is found to be gaming the system to their advantage. And it will happen.

Customer Generation is a key method that Web performance measurements are used by firms to clearly show how their service is superior to what a prospect currently has, or is also considering. However, this method does come with substantial caveats, including

  • The need to measure what is relevant
  • The need to measure from where the prospect has the greatest interest
  • The need to consider that gaming the system to show advantage will cost a firm in the end.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Origin v. CoralCDN: a GrabPERF test

December 30th, 2006 by smp | Comments | Filed in Life

I have set up a test to check the performance of the CoralCDN network against that of the origin server. You can view the comparative results here.

The tests used the base HTML document of this blog as the target.

The results so far indicate that there is a slight performance penalty when using CoralCDN in an ad hoc manner. They do offer continuous CDN services, and these likely provide better overall service under normal conditions.

However, it is likely that in situations where server load or traffic volumes increase substantially, the distributed performance system, even in an ad hoc manner, would save your bacon.

I will watch these tests over the next few days to see if any unique performance patterns appear.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Performance Improvement From Caching and Compression

October 3rd, 2006 by smp | Comments | Filed in Web Performance, WebPerformance.Org

This paper is an extension of the work done for another article that highlighted the performance benefits of retrieving uncompressed and compressed objects directly from the origin server. I wanted to add a proxy server into the stream and determine if proxy servers helped improve the performance of object downloads, and by how much.

Using the same series of objects in the original compression article[1], the CURL tests were re-run 3 times:

 

  1. Directly from the origin server
  2. Through the proxy server, to load the files into cache
  3. Through the proxy server, to avoid retrieving files from the origin.[2]

This series of three tests was repeated twice: once for the uncompressed files, and then for the compressed objects.[3]

As can be seen clearly in the plots below, compression caused web page download times to improve greatly, when the objects were retrieved from the source. However, the performance difference between compressed and uncompressed data all but disappears when retrieving objects from a proxy server on a corporate LAN.

uncompressed_pages

compressed_pages

Instead of the linear growth between object size and download time seen in both of the retrieval tests that used the origin server (Source and Proxy Load data), the Proxy Draw data clearly shows the benefits that accrue when a proxy server is added to a network to assist with serving HTTP traffic.

  MEAN DOWNLOAD TIME
Uncompressed Pages
Total Time Uncompressed — No Proxy 0.256
Total Time Uncompressed — Proxy Load 0.254
Total Time Uncompressed — Proxy Draw 0.110
Compressed Pages
Total Time Compressed — No Proxy 0.181
Total Time Compressed — Proxy Load 0.140
Total Time Compressed — Proxy Draw 0.104

The data above shows just how much of an improvement is gained by adding a local proxy server, explicit caching descriptions and compression can add to a Web site. For sites that do force a great of requests to be returned directly to the origin server, compression will be of great help in reducing bandwidth costs and improving performance. However, by allowing pages to be cached in local proxy servers, the difference between compressed and uncompressed pages vanishes.

Conclusion

Compression is a very good start when attempting to optimize performance. The addition of explicit caching messages in server responses which allow proxy servers to serve cached data to clients on remote local LANs can improve performance to even a greater extent than compression can. These two should be used together to improve the overall performance of Web sites.


[1]The test set was made up of the 1952 HTML files located in the top directory of the Linux Documentation Project HTML archive.

[2]All of the pages in these tests announced the following server response header indicating its cacheability:

Cache-Control: max-age=3600

[3]A note on the compressed files: all compression was performed dynamically by mod_gzip for Apache/1.3.27.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Compressing Web Output Using mod_deflate and Apache 2.0.x

October 3rd, 2006 by smp | Comments | Filed in Web Performance, WebPerformance.Org

In a previous paper, the use of mod_gzip to dynamically compress the output from an Apache server. With the growing use of the Apache 2.0.x family of Web servers, the question arises of how to perform a similar GZIP-encoding function within this server. The developers of the Apache 2.0.x servers have included a module in the codebase for the server to perform just this task.

mod_deflate is included in the Apache 2.0.x source package, and compiling it in is a simple matter of adding it to the configure command.

	./configure --enable-modules=all --enable-mods-shared=all --enable-deflate

When the server is made and installed, the GZIP-encoding of documents can be enabled in one of two ways: explicit exclusion of files by extension; or by explcit inclusion of files by MIME type. These methods are specified in the httpd.conf file.


Explicit Exclusion

SetOutputFilter DEFLATE
DeflateFilterNote ratio
SetEnvIfNoCase Request_URI .(?:gif|jpe?g|png)$ no-gzip dont-vary
SetEnvIfNoCase Request_URI .(?:exe|t?gz|zip|bz2|sit|rar)$ no-gzip dont-vary
SetEnvIfNoCase Request_URI .pdf$ no-gzip dont-vary

Explicit Inclusion

DeflateFilterNote ratio
AddOutputFilterByType DEFLATE text/*
AddOutputFilterByType DEFLATE application/ms* application/vnd* application/postscript

Both methods enable the automatic GZIP-encoding of all MIME-types, except image and PDF files, as they leave the server. Image files and PDF files are excluded as they are already in a highly compressed format. In fact, PDFs become unreadable by Adobe’s Acrobat Reader if they are further compressed by mod_deflate or mod_gzip.On the server used for testing mod_deflate for this article, no Windows executables or compressed files are served to visitors. However, for safety’s sake, please ensure that compressed files and binaries are not GZIP-encoded by your Web server application.For the file-types indicated in the exclude statements, the server is told explicitly not to send the Vary header. The Vary header indicates to any proxy or cache server which particular condition(s) will cause this response to Vary from other responses to the same request.

If a client sends a request which does not include the Accept-Encoding: gzip header, then the item which is stored in the cache cannot be returned to the requesting client if the Accept-Encoding headers do not match. The request must then be passed directly to the origin server to obtain a non-encoded version. In effect, proxy servers may store 2 or more copies of the same file, depending on the client request conditions which cause the server response to Vary.

Removing the Vary response requirement for objects not handled means that if the objects do not vary due to any other directives on the server (browser type, for example), then the cached object can be served up without any additional requests until the Time-To-Live (TTL) of the cached object has expired.

In examining the performance of mod_deflate against mod_gzip, the one item that distinguished mod_deflate from mod_gzip in versions of Apache prior to 2.0.45 was the amount of compression that occurred. The examples below demonstrate that the compression algorithm for mod_gzip produces between 4-6% more compression than mod_deflate for the same file.[1]

Table 1 — /compress/homepage2.html

Compression Size Compression %
No compression 56380 bytes n/a
Apache 1.3.x/mod_gzip 16333 bytes 29% of original
Apache 2.0.x/mod_deflate 19898 bytes 35% of original

Table 2 — /documents/spierzchala-resume.ps

Compression Size Compression %
No Compression 63451 bytes n/a
Apache 1.3.x/mod_gzip 19758 bytes 31% of original
Apache 2.0.x/mod_deflate 23407 bytes 37% of original

Attempts to increase the compression ratio of mod_deflate in Apache 2.044 and lower using the directives provided for this module produced no further decrease in transferred file size. A comment from one of the authors of the mod_deflate module stated that the module was written specifically to ensure that server performance was not degraded by using this compression method. The module was, by default, performing the fastest compression possible, rather than a mid-range compromise between speed and final file size.

Starting with Apache 2.0.45, the compression level of mod_deflate is configurable using the DeflateCompressionLevel directive. This directive accepts values between 1 (fastest compression speed; lowest compression ratio) and 9 (slowest compression speed; highest compression ratio), with the default value being 6. This simple change makes the compression in mod_deflate comparable to mod_gzip out of the box.

Using mod_deflate for Apache 2.0.x is a quick and effective way to decrease the size of the files that are sent to clients. Anything that can produce between 50% and 80% in bandwidth savings with so little effort should definitely be considered for any and all Apache 2.0.x deployments wishing to use the default Apache codebase.


[1] A note on the compression in mod_deflate for Apache 2.044 and lower: The level of compression can be modified by changing the ZLIB compression setting in mod_deflate.c from Z_BEST_SPEED (equivalent to “gzip -1″) to Z_BEST_COMPRESSION (equivalent to “gzip -9″). These defaults can also be replaced with a numeric value between 1 and 9.

More info on hacking mod_deflate for Apache 2.0.44 and lower can be found here.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Using Client-Side Cache Solutions And Server-Side Caching Configurations To Improve Internet Performance

October 3rd, 2006 by smp | Comments | Filed in Web Performance, WebPerformance.Org

In todays highly competitive e-commerce marketplace, the performance of a web-site plays a key role in attracting new and retaining current clients. New technologies are being developed to help speed up the delivery of content to customers while still allowing companies to get their message across using rich, graphical content. However, in the rush to find new technologies to improve internet performance, one low-cost alternative to these new technologies is often overlooked: client-side content caching.

This process is often overlooked or dismissed by web administrators and content providers seeking to improve performance. The major concern that is expressed by these groups is that they need to ensure that clients always get the freshest content possible. In their eyes, allowing their content to be cached is perceived as losing control of their message.

This bias against caching is, in most cases, unjustified. By understanding how server software can be used to distinguish unique caching policies for each type of content being delivered, client-side performance gains can be achieved with no new hardware or software being added to an existing web-site system.

Caching

When a client requests web content, this information is either retrieved directly from the origin server, from a browser cache on a local hard drive or from a nearby cache server[1]. Where and for how long the data is stored depends on how the data is tagged when it leaves the web server. However, when discussing cache content, there are three states that content can be in: non-cacheable, fresh or stale.

The non-cacheable state indicates a file that should never be cached by any device that receives it and that every request for that file must be retrieved from the origin server. This places an additional load on both client and server bandwidth, as well as on the server which responds to these additional requests. In many cases, such as database queries, news content, and personalized content marked by unique cookies, the content provider may explicitly not want data to be cached to prevent stale data from being received by the client.

A fresh file is one that has a clearly defined future expiration date and/or does not indicate that it is non-cacheable. A file with a defined lifespan is only valid for a set number of seconds after it is downloaded, or until the explicitly stated expiry date and time is reached. At that point, the file is considered stale and must be re-verified (preferred as it requires less bandwidth) or re-loaded from the origin server.[2]

If a file does not explicitly indicate it is non-cacheable, but does not indicate an explicit expiry period or time, the cache server assigns the file an expiry time defined in the cache servers configuration. When that deadline is reached and the cache server receives a request for that file, the server checks with the origin server to see whether the content has changed. If the file is unchanged, the counter is reset and the existing content is served to the client; if the file is changed, the new content is downloaded, cached according to its settings and then served to the client.

A stale file is a file in cache that is no longer valid. A client has requested information that had previously been stored in the cache and the control data for the object indicates that it has expired or is too stale to be considered for serving. The browser or cache server must now either re-validate the file with or retrieve the file from the origin server before the data can served to the client.

The state of an item being considered for caching is determined using one or more of 5 HTTP header messages[3] two server messages, one client message, and two that can be sent by either the client or the server.[4] These headers include: Pragma: no-cache; Cache-Control; Expires; Last-Modified; and If-Modified-Since. Each of these identifies a particular condition that the proxy server must adhere to when deciding whether the content is fresh enough to be served to the requesting client.

Pragma: no-cache is an HTTP/1.0 client and server header that informs caching servers not to serve the requested content to the client from their cache (client-side) and not cache the marked information if they receive it (server-side). This response has been deprecated in favor of the new HTTP/1.1 Cache-Control header, but is still used in many browsers and servers. The continued use of this header is necessary to ensure backwards-compatibility, as it cannot be guaranteed that all devices and servers will understand the HTTP/1.1 server headers.

Cache-Control is a family of HTTP/1.1 client and server messages that can be used to clearly define not only if an item can be cached, but also for how long and how it should be validated upon expiry. This more precise family of messages replaces the older Pragma: no-cache message. There are a large number of options for this header field, but four that are especially relevant to this discussion.[5]

Cache-Control: private/public

This setting indicates what type of devices can cache the data. The private setting allows the marked items to be cached by the requesting client, but not by any cache servers encountered en-route. The public setting indicates that any device can cache this content. By default, public is assumed unless private is explicitly stated.

Cache-Control: no-cache

This is the HTTP/1.1 equivalent of Pragma: no-cache and can be used by clients to force an end-to-end retrieval of the requested files and by servers to prevent items from being cached.

Cache-Control: max-age=x

This setting allows the indicated files to be cached either by the client or the cache server for x seconds.

Cache-Control: must-revalidate

This setting informs the cache server that if the item in cache is stale, it must be re-validated before it can be served to the client.

A number of these settings can be combined to form a larger Cache-Control header message. For example, an administrator may want to define how long the content is valid for, and then indicate that, at the end of that period, all new requests must be revalidated with the origin server. This can be accomplished by creating a multi-field Cache-Control header message like the one below.

Cache-Control: max-age=3600, must-revalidate

Expires sets an explicit expiry date and time for the requested file. This is usually in the future, but a server administrator can ensure that an object is always re-validated by setting an expiry date that is in the past an example of this will be shown below.

Last-Modified can indicate one of several conditions, but the most common is the last time the state of the requested object was updated. The cache server can use this to confirm an object has not changed since it was inserted into the cache, allowing for re-validation, versus completely re-loading, of objects in cache.

If-Modified-Since is a client-side header message that is sent either by a browser or a cache server and is set by the Last-Modified value of the object in cache. When the origin server has not set an explicit cache expiry value and the cache server has had to set an expiry time on the object using its own internal configuration, the Last-Modified value is used to confirm whether content has changed on the origin server. If the Last-Modified value on an object held by the origin server is newer than that held by the client, the entire file is re-loaded. If these values are the same, the origin server returns a 304 Not Modified HTTP message and the cache object is then served to the client and has its cache-defined counter reset.

Using an application trace program, clients are able to capture the data that flows out of and in to the browser application. The following two examples show how a server can use header messages to mark content as non-cacheable, or set very specific caching values.

Server Messages for a Non-Cacheable Object

HTTP/1.0 200 OK
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Length: 19662
Pragma: no-cache
Cache-Control: no-cache
Server: Roxen/2.1.185
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Expires: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 00:18:55 GMT

In this example, the server returns three indications that the content is non-cacheable. The first two are the Pragma: no-cache and Cache-Control: no-cache statements. With most client and cache server configurations, one of these headers on its own should be enough to prevent the requested object from being stored in cache. The web administrator in this example has chosen to ensure that any device, regardless of the version of HTTP used, will clearly understand that this object is non-cacheable.

However, in order to guarantee that this item is never stored in or served from cache, the Expires statement is set to a date and time that is in the past.[6] These three statements should be enough to guarantee that no cache serves this file without performing an end-to-end transfer of this object from the origin server with each request.

Specific Caching Information in Server Messages

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 14:50:31 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.12
Cache-Control: max-age=43200
Expires: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 02:50:31 GMT
Last-Modified: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 23:52:56 GMT
ETag: "1cbf3-dfd-3a2adcd8"
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: 3581
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html

In the example above, the server returns a header message Cache-Control: max-age=43200. This immediately informs the cache that the object can be stored in cache for up to 12 hours. This 12-hour time limit is further guaranteed by the Expires header, which is set to a date value that is exactly 12 hours ahead of the value set in the Date header message.[7]

These two examples present two variations of web server responses containing information that makes the requested content either completely non-cacheable or cacheable only for a very specific period of time.

How does caching work?

Content is cached by devices on the internet, and these devices then serve this stored content when the same file is requested by the original client or another client that uses that same cache. This rather simplistic description covers a number of different cache scenarios, but two will be the focus of this paper browser caching and caching servers.[8]

For the remainder of this paper, the caching environment that will be discussed is one involving a network with a number of clients using a single cache server, the general internet, and a server network with a series of web servers on it.

Browser Caching

Browser caching is what most people are familiar with, as all web browsers perform this behavior by default. With this type of caching, the web browser stores a copy of the requested files in a cache directory on the client machine in order to help speed up page downloads. This performance increase is achieved by serving stored files from this directory on the local hard drive instead of retrieving these same files from the web server, which resides across a much slower connection than the one between the hard-drive and the local application, when an item that is stored in cache is requested.

To ensure that old content is not being served to the client, the browser checks its cache first to see if an item is in cache. If the item is in cache, the browser then confirms the state of the object in cache with the origin server to see if the item has been modified at the source since the browser last downloaded it. If the object has not been modified, the origin server sends a 304 Not Modified message, and the item is served from the local hard drive and not across the much slower internet.

First Request for a file

GET /file.html HTTP/1.1
Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, application/vnd.ms-powerpoint, application/vnd.ms-excel, application/msword, application/x-comet, */*
Accept-Language: en-us
Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows NT 5.0)
Host: 24.5.203.101
Connection: Keep-Alive

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 20:00:22 GMT
Server: Apache
Cache-Control: max-age=604800
Last-Modified: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:28:38 GMT
ETag: "1df-28f1-3a2520a6"
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: 10481
Keep-Alive: timeout=5, max=100
Connection: Keep-Alive
Content-Type: text/html

In the above example[9], the file is retrieved from the server for the first time, and the server sends a 200 OK response and then returns the requested file. The items marked in blue indicate cache control data sent to the client by the server.

Second Request for a file

GET /file.html HTTP/1.1
Accept: */*
Accept-Language: en-us
Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate
If-Modified-Since: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:28:38 GMT
If-None-Match: "1df-28f1-3a2520a6"
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows NT 5.0)
Host: 24.5.203.101
Connection: Keep-Alive

HTTP/1.1 304 Not Modified
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 20:01:07 GMT
Server: Apache
Connection: Keep-Alive
Keep-Alive: timeout=5, max=100
ETag: "1df-28f1-3a2520a6"
Cache-Control: max-age=604800

The second request for a file sees the client send a request for the same object 40 seconds later, but with two additions. The server asks if the file has been modified since the last time it was requested by the client (If-Modified-Since). If the date in that field cannot be used by the origin server to confirm the state of the requested object, the client asks if the objects Etag tracking code has changed using the If-None-Match header message.[10] The origin server responds by verifying that object has not been modified and confirms this by returning the same Etag value that was sent by the client. This rapid client-server exchange allows the browser to quickly determine that it can serve the file directly from its local cache directory.

Caching Server

A caching server performs functions similar to those of a browser cache, only on a much larger scale. Where a browser cache is responsible for storing web objects for a single browser application on a single machine, a cache server stores web objects for a larger number of clients or perhaps even an entire network. With a cache server, all web requests from a network are passed through caching server, which then will serve the requested files to the client. The cache server can deliver content either directly from its own cache of objects, or by retrieving objects from the internet and then serving them to clients. [11]

Cache servers are a more efficient than browser caches as this network-level caching process makes the object available to all users of the network once it has been retrieved. With a browser cache, each user and, in fact, each browser application on a specific client must maintain a unique cache of files that is not shared with other clients or applications.

Also, cache servers use additional information provided by the web server in the headers sent along with each web request. Browser caches simply re-validate content with each request, confirming that the content has not been modified since it was last requested. Cache servers use the values sent in the Expires and Cache-Control header messages to set explicit expiry times for objects they store.

First Request for a file through a cache server

GET http://24.5.203.101/file.html HTTP/1.1
Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, application/vnd.ms-powerpoint, application/vnd.ms-excel, application/msword, application/x-comet, */*
Accept-Language: en-us
Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows NT 5.0)
Host: 24.5.203.101
Proxy-Connection: Keep-Alive

HTTP/1.0 200 OK
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 15:46:42 GMT
Server: Apache
Cache-Control: max-age=604800
Last-Modified: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:28:38 GMT
ETag: "1df-28f1-3a2520a6"
Content-Length: 10481
Content-Type: text/html
Connection: Close

The first request from the client through a cache server shows two very interesting things.[12] The first is that although the client request was sent out as HTTP/1.1, the server responded using HTTP/1.0. The browser caching example above demonstrated that the responding server uses HTTP/1.1. The change in protocol is the first clue that this data was served by a cache server.

The second item of interest is that the file that is initially served by the proxy server has a Date field set to January 16, 2001. This server is not serving stale data; this is the default time set by the cache server to indicate a new object that has been inserted in the cache.[13]

Second Request for a file through a cache server Second Browser

GET http://24.5.203.101/file.html HTTP/1.1
Host: 24.5.203.101
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; 0.7) Gecko/20010109
Accept: */*
Accept-Language: en
Accept-Encoding: gzip,deflate,compress,identity
Keep-Alive: 300
Connection: keep-alive

HTTP/1.0 200 OK
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 15:46:42 GMT
Server: Apache
Cache-Control: max-age=604800
Last-Modified: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:28:38 GMT
ETag: "1df-28f1-3a2520a6"
Content-Length: 10481
Content-Type: text/html
Connection: Close

Third Request for a file through a cache server Second Client Machine

GET http://24.5.203.101/file.html HTTP/1.0
Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,
application/vnd.ms-excel, application/msword, */*
Accept-Language: en-us
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows NT 5.0)
Host: 24.5.203.101
Proxy-Connection: Keep-Alive

HTTP/1.0 200 OK
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 15:46:42 GMT
Server: Apache
Cache-Control: max-age=604800
Last-Modified: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 15:28:38 GMT
ETag: "1df-28f1-3a2520a6"
Content-Length: 10481
Content-Type: text/html
Connection: Close

A second request through the cache server, using another browser on the same client configured to use the cache server, indicates that this client retrieved the file from the cache server, not from the origin server. The Date field is the same as the initial request and the protocol has once again been swapped from HTTP/1.1 to HTTP/1.0.

The third example shows that the object is now not only available to different browsers on the same machine, but now that it is available to different machines on the same network, using the same cache server. By requesting the same content from another client machine on the same network, it is clear that the object is served to the client by the cache server, as the Date field set to the same value observed in the previous two examples.

Why should data be cached?

Many web pages that are downloaded by web browsers today are marked as being non-cacheable. The theory behind this is that there is so much dynamic and personalized content on the internet today that if any of it is cached, people using the web may not have the freshest possible content or they may end up receiving content that was personalized for another client making use of the same cache server.

The dynamic and personalized nature of the web today does make this a challenge, but if the design of a web-site is examined closely, it can be seen that these new features of the web can work hand-in-hand with content caching.

How does caching the perceived user experience? In both the browser caching and caching server discussions above, it has been demonstrated that caching helps attack the problem of internet performance on three fronts. First, caching moves content closer to the client, by placing it on local hard-drives or in local network caches. With data stored on or near the client, the network delay encountered when trying to retrieve the data is reduced or eliminated.

Secondly, caching reduces network traffic by serving content that is fresh as described above. Cache servers will attempt to confirm with the origin server that the objects stored in cache if not explicitly marked for expiry are still valid and do not need to be fully re-loaded across the internet. In order to gain the maximum performance benefit from object caching, it is vital to specify explicit cache expiry dates or periods.

The final performance benefit to properly defining caching configurations of content on an origin server is that server load is reduced. If the server uses carefully planned explicit caching policies, server load can be greatly reduced, improving the user experience.

When examining how the configuration of a web server can be modified to improve content cacheability, it is important keep in mind two very important considerations. First, the content and site administrators must have a very granular level of control over how the content being served will or wont be cached once it leaves their server. Secondly, within this need to control how content is cached, ways should be found to minimize the impact that client requests have on bandwidth and server load by allowing some content to be cached.

Take the example of a large, popular site that is noted for its dynamic content and rich graphics. Despite having a great deal of dynamic content, caching can serve a beneficial purpose without compromising the nature of the content being served. The primary focus of the caching evaluation should be on the rich graphical content of the site.

If the images of this site all have unique names that are not shared by any other object on the site, or the images all reside in the same directory tree, then this content can be marked differently within the server configuration, allowing it to be cached.[14] A policy that allows these objects to be cached for 60, 120 or 180 seconds could have a large affect on reducing the bandwidth and server strain at the modified site. During this seemingly short period of time, several dozen of even several hundred different requests for the same object could originate from a large corporate network or ISP. If local cache servers can handle these requests, both the server and client sides of the transaction could see immediate performance improvements.

Taking a server header from an example used earlier in the paper, it can be demonstrated how even a slight change to the server header itself can help control the caching properties of dynamic content.

Dynamic Content

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 14:50:31 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.12
Cache-Control: no-cache, must-revalidate
Expires: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 14:50:31 GMT
Last-Modified: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 23:52:56 GMT
ETag: "1cbf3-dfd-3a2adcd8"
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: 3581
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html

Static Content

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 14:50:31 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.12
Cache-Control: max-age=43200, must-revalidate
Expires: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 02:50:31 GMT
Last-Modified: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 23:52:56 GMT
ETag: "1cbf3-dfd-3a2adcd8"
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: 3581
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html

As can been seen above, the only difference in the headers sent with the Dynamic Content and the Static Content are the Cache-Control and Expires values. The Dynamic Content example sets Cache-Control to no-cache, must-revalidate and Expires to one month in the past. This should prevent any cache from storing this data or serving it when a request is received to retrieve the same content.

The Static Content modifies these two settings, making the requested object cacheable for up to 12 hours Cache-Control value set to 43,200 seconds and an Expires value that is exactly 12 hours in the future. After the period specified, the browser cache or caching server must re-validate the content before it can be served in response to local requests.

The must-revalidate item is not necessary, but it does add additional control over content. Some cache servers will attempt to serve content that is stale under certain circumstances, such as if the origin server for the content cannot be reached. The must-revalidate setting forces the cache server to re-validate the stale content, and return an error if it cannot be retrieved.

Differentiating caching policies based on the type of content served allows a very granular level of control over what is not cached, what is cached, and for how long the content can be cached for and still be considered fresh. In this way, server and web administrators can improve site performance a little or no additional development or capital cost.

It is very important to note that defining specific server-side caching policies will only have a beneficial affect on server performance if explicit object caching configurations are used. The two main types of explicit caching configurations are those set by the Expires header and the Cache-Control family of headers as seen in the example above. If no explicit value is set for object expiry, performance gains that might have been achieved are eliminated by a flood of unnecessary client and cache server requests to re-validate unchanged objects with the origin server.

Conclusion

Despite the growth of dynamic and personalized content on the web, there is still a great deal of highly cacheable material that is served to clients. However, many sites do not take advantage of the performance gains that can be achieved by isolating the dynamic and personalized content of their site from the relatively static content that is served alongside it.

Using the inherent ability to set explicit caching policies within most modern web-server applications, objects handled by a web-sever can be separated into unique content groups. With distinct caching policies for each defined group of web objects, the web-site administrator, not the cache administrator, has control over how long content is served without re-validation or re-loading. This granular control of explicit content caching policies can allow web-sites to achieve noticeable performance gains with no additional outlay for hardware and software.


Endnotes

[1] The proximity that is referred to here is network proximity, not physical proximity. For example, AOLs network has some of the worlds largest cache servers and they are concentrated in Virginia; however, because of the structure of AOLs network, these cache servers are not far from the client.

[2] A re-verify is preferred as it consumes less bandwidth than a full re-load of the object from the origin server. With a re-verification, the origin server just confirms that the file is still valid and the cache server can simply reset the timer on the object.

[3] An HTTP header message is a data-control message sent by a web client or a web server to indicate a variety of data transmission parameters concerning the requests being made. Caching information is included in the information sent to and from the server.

[4] There are actually a substantially larger number of header messages that can be applied to a client or a server data transmission to communicate caching information. The most up-to-date list of the messages can be found in section 13 of RFC 2616, Hypertext Transfer Protocol — HTTP/1.1.

[5] A complete listing of the Cache-Control settings can be found in RFC 2616, Hypertext Transfer Protocol — HTTP/1.1, section 14.9.

[6] The initial file request that generated this header was sent on February 12, 2001.

[7] The Date header message indicates the date and time on the origin server when it responded to the request.

[8] A third type of caching, Reverse Caching or HTTPD Accelerators, are used at the server side to place highly cacheable content into high-speed machines that use solid-state storage to make retrieval of these objects very fast. This reduces the load on the web servers and allows them to concentrate on the generation of dynamic and personalized content.

[9] The data shown here is just application trace data.

[10] The Etag or entity tag is used to identify specific objects on a web server. Each item has unique Etag value, and this value is changed each time the file is modified. As an example, the Etag for a local web file was captured. This data was re-captured after the file was modified two carriage returns were inserted.

Test 1 Original File

ETag: "21ccd-10cb-399a1b33"

Test 2 Modified File

ETag: "21ccd-10cd-3a8c0597"

[11] This is where the other name for a cache server comes from, as the cache server acts as a proxy for the client making the request. The term proxy server is outdated as the term proxy assumes that the device will do exactly as the client requests; this is not always the case due to the security and content control mechanisms which are a part of all cache servers today. The client isnt always guaranteed to receive the complete content they requested. Infact, many networks do not allow any content into the network that does not first go through the cache devices on that network.

[12] The data shown here is just application trace data. For a more complete example of what the application and network properties of a web object retrieval are, please see Appendix A and B.

[13] All the data captures used in this example were taken on February 11-14, 2001.

[14] The description used here is based on the configuration options available with the Apache/1.3.x server family, which allows caching options to be set down to the file level. Other server applications may vary in their methods of applying individual caching policies to different sets of content on the same server.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Performance Improvement From Caching and Compression

April 30th, 2005 by smp | Comments | Filed in smp

This paper is an extension of the work done for another article that highlighted the performance benefits of retrieving uncompressed and compressed objects directly from the origin server. I wanted to add a proxy server into the stream and determine if proxy servers helped improve the performance of object downloads, and by how much.

Using the same series of objects in the original compression article[1], the CURL tests were re-run 3 times:

  1. Directly from the origin server
  2. Through the proxy server, to load the files into cache
  3. Through the proxy server, to avoid retrieving files from the origin.[2]

eries of three tests was repeated twice: once for the uncompressed files, and then for the compressed objects.[3]

As can be seen clearly in the plots below, compression caused web page download times to improve greatly, when the objects were retrieved from the source. However, the performance difference between compressed and uncompressed data all but disappears when retrieving objects from a proxy server on a corporate LAN.


Instead of the linear growth between object size and download time seen in both of the retrieval tests that used the origin server (Source and Proxy Load data), the Proxy Draw data clearly shows the benefits that accrue when a proxy server is added to a network to assist with serving HTTP traffic.

Uncompressed Pages

MEAN DOWNLOAD TIME
Total Time Uncompressed — No Proxy 0.256
Total Time Uncompressed — Proxy Load 0.254
Total Time Uncompressed — Proxy Draw 0.110

Compressed Pages

Total Time Compressed — No Proxy 0.181
Total Time Compressed — Proxy Load 0.140
Total Time Compressed — Proxy Draw 0.104

The data above shows just how much of an improvement is gained by adding a local proxy server, explicit caching descriptions and compression can add to a Web site. For sites that do force a great of requests to be returned directly to the origin server, compression will be of great help in reducing bandwidth costs and improving performance. However, by allowing pages to be cached in local proxy servers, the difference between compressed and uncompressed pages vanishes.

Conclusion

Compression is a very good start when attempting to optimize performance. The addition of explicit caching messages in server responses which allow proxy servers to serve cached data to clients on remote local LANs can improve performance to even a greater extent than compression can. These two should be used together to improve the overall performance of Web sites.


[1] The test set was made up of the 1952 HTML files located in the top directory of the Linux Documentation Project HTML archive.

[2] All of the pages in these tests announced the following server response header indicating its cacheability: Cache-Control: max-age=3600

[3] A note on the compressed files: all compression was performed dynamically by mod_gzip for Apache/1.3.27.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,