2.0 speed/performance concerns

Hi Guys

I've checking out 2.0 and whilst there's a HUGE amount to love, I noticed that it seemed to be somewhat slower than 1.9

I carried out a number of tests to try and quantify this, and here's what I found.

I'm running XP on a dual 2.13 GHz/2GB PC - VS2010 and both 1.9 and 2.0 sites running with VS2010 development web server.

On the 2.0 site, each time a page is requested, even if its a page visited many times before in the session (i.e. should be fully cached), there is a few seconds of CPU activity - its not SQL server that's been thrashed, it's VS2010 and the web server.

I ran both 1.9 and 2.0 sites up in firefox with firebug and timed repeated refreshes of the computers category page.

The 1.9 site averaged a response time for GET 30-computers.aspx of 400mS

The 2.0 site averaged a response time for GET computers of 3 seconds

I'm hoping there's a simple explanation.......

Many thanks
Tony

Hello,

I have the same problem with the speed of version 2.0 BETA.

Thanks for the help!

Guys time to upgrade your OS =)

I never had any issues with nopCommerce loading speed. Also v2.0 loads twice faster than 1.9

Hello,

my PC : Win 7 Ultimate, 8GB RAM, Intel SSD, 2x3.2 GHZ CPU, Visual Studio Pro 2010, SQL SERVER 2008
(with all new Updates)

Visual Studio Pro 2010 - RUN: 1.9 Version = all pages load < 1sec
Visual Studio Pro 2010 - RUN: 2.0 Version = all pages load > 2sec

thank you
Dirk

Do you guys have IIS installed? Try running the site from their rather than WebDev (cassini).

Thanks for the replies. I don't see why running the site in IIS should make a difference in this context?

If were to run both versions in IIS, would I suddenly see 2.0 speed up relative to 1.9?

I'm running two different versions in the same environment and getting wildly different results. This is surely the relevant factor here.......

eggheadtony wrote:

On my machine, im getting, on average about 750ms.

I have ran dotTrace and I couldn't find any bottleneck.

I think you're perhaps slightly missing the point here

The ABSOLUTE value of the response is not relevant - you probably have a much faster PC which would explain the difference between your 750mS and my 3S

The RELEVANT factor here is: same environment, same PC, different versions, big performance differential

Not quite certain why my previous post got voted down - I believe I make a legitimate point.

I've now repeated the test on another PC and can see the same outcome - 1.9 is many times faster than 2.0

I so want 2.0 to be an excellent platform, but with performance as I've seen it so far, it couldn't be considered as an option for a site with more than a handful of visitors per day.

I will do some profiling tests later when I have more free time. I quickly carried some out last night and it looks like there are around 500 method calls for every page load. I will need to spend some more time to draw meaningful conclusions from the tests that I ran, but right now, my confidence in 2.0 is somewhat uncertain

Cheers

Tony

eggheadtony wrote:

Please let us now if you find anything. I'm going to do some load testing this evening.