On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Rolf Lampa [RIL] <rolf.lampa(a)rilnet.com>wrote;wrote:
File caching is definitely worth it as long as you have disk space; I just
did some unscientific, unsophisticated testing, and fetching a page stored
in the file cache was about 5 times faster than Memcached/eAccelerator. Of
course, I'm sure there's also some overhead for writing the cached file when
there's a file cache miss; the average benefit probably depends on whether
the hits to your site are focused on a few articles (good) or roughly evenly
distributed over all 800k pages (bad).
In any event, you still need the other cache types, since the file cache
only works for anonymous users.
Which one seems to be preferred on my setup? Perhaps there's an overview
page about cache strategy (for my kind of server
setup) which I have
missed?
Just to be sure, did you look at
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Cache
?