Performance Optimization For Highly Interactive Websites

I recently completed development of a mid-traficked(?) website (peak 60k hits/hour), however, the site only needs to be updated once a minute - and achieving the required performance can be summed up by a single word: "caching".

For a site like SO where the data feeding the site changes all the time, I would imagine a different approach is required.

Page cache times presumably need to be short or non-existent, and updates need to be propogated across all the webservers very rapidly to keep all users up to date.

My guess is that you'd need a distributed cache to control the serving of data and pages that is updated on the order of a few seconds, with perhaps a distributed cache above the database to mediate writes?

Can those more experienced that I outline some of the key architectural/design principles they employ to ensure highly interactive websites like SO are performant?


The vast majority of sites have many more reads than writes. It's not uncommon to have thousands or even millions of reads to every write.

Therefore, any scaling solution depends on separating the scaling of the reads from the scaling of the writes. Typically scaling reads is really cheap and easy, scaling the writes is complicated and costly.

The most straightforward way to scale reads is to cache entire pages at a time and expire them after a certain number of seconds. If you look at the popular web-site, Slashdot. you can see that this is the way they scale their site. Unfortunately, this caching strategy can result in counter-intuitive behaviour for the end user.

I'm assuming from your question that you don't want this primitive sort of caching. Like you mention, you'll need to update the cache in place.

This is not as scary as it sounds. The key thing to realise is that from the server's point of view. Stackoverflow does not update all the time. It updates fairly rarely. Maybe once or twice per second. To a computer a second is nearly an eternity.

Moreover, updates tend to occur to items in the cache that do not depend on each other. Consider Stack Overflow as example. I imagine that each question page is cached separately. Most questions probably have an update per minute on average for the first fifteen minutes and then probably once an hour after that.

Thus, in most applications you barely need to scale your writes. They're so few and far between that you can have one server doing the writes; Updating the cache in place is actually a perfectly viable solution. Unless you have extremely high traffic, you're going to get very few concurrent updates to the same cached item at the same time.

So how do you set this up? My preferred solution is to cache each page individually to disk and then have many web-heads delivering these static pages from some mutually accessible space.

When a write needs to be done it is done from exactly one server and this updates that particular cached html page. Each server owns it's own subset of the cache so there isn't a single point of failure. The update process is carefully crafted so that a transaction ensures that no two requests are not writing to the file at exactly the same time.

I've found this design has met all the scaling requirements we have so far required. But it will depend on the nature of the site and the nature of the load as to whether this is the right thing to do for your project.

You might be interested in this article which describes how wikimedia's servers are structured. Very enlightening!

The article links to this pdf - be sure not to miss it.

Need Your Help

EWS - how do I find all incomplete tasks?

c# exchangewebservices

I am using Exchange Web Services to try to get a list of all Outlook tasks which are not complete.