PHP-FPM Integration

Hello Folks,

I do some tests. Installed 2 Virtual KVM Servers with Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 7.4 (Maipo).

server1: RHEL 7.4, CentOS WebPanel, PHP 7.0.20, MariaDB, Apache 2.4.6

server2: RHEL 7.4, ISPConfig, PHP FPM 7.1.8, MariaDB, Apache 2.4.6 & Varnish Cache & Nginx Reverse Proxy

And server2 with PHP-FPM works faster at the same website which is based on wordpress.

Here are some results from apache bench:

server1: CentOS WebPanel, PHP 7.0.20 Server Software:        CentOS Server Hostname:        XXXXX Server Port:            443 SSL/TLS Protocol:       TLSv1.2,ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384,2048,256 Document Path:          / Document Length:        43234 bytes Concurrency Level:      10 Time taken for tests:   43.213 seconds Complete requests:      100 Failed requests:        0 Write errors:           0 Total transferred:      4354000 bytes HTML transferred:       4323400 bytes Requests per second:    2.31 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request:       4321.343 [ms] (mean) Time per request:       432.134 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate:          98.39 [Kbytes/sec] received Connection Times (ms)               min  mean[+/-sd] median   max Connect:        9   29  16.2     26     111 Processing:   932 4171 656.1   4158    6073 Waiting:      569 3682 605.1   3654    5585 Total:        943 4200 661.2   4184    6108 Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)   50%   4184   66%   4319   75%   4400   80%   4632   90%   4844   95%   5120   98%   6062   99%   6108  100%   6108 (longest request)

server2: ISPConfig, PHP-FPM 7.1.8 Server Software:        Apache/2.4.6 Server Hostname:        XXXXX Server Port:            443 SSL/TLS Protocol:       TLSv1.2,ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384,2048,256 Document Path:          / Document Length:        43247 bytes Concurrency Level:      10 Time taken for tests:   6.636 seconds Complete requests:      100 Failed requests:        0 Write errors:           0 Total transferred:      4362700 bytes HTML transferred:       4324700 bytes Requests per second:    15.07 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request:       663.595 [ms] (mean) Time per request:       66.359 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate:          642.03 [Kbytes/sec] received Connection Times (ms)               min  mean[+/-sd] median   max Connect:        8   26  13.1     24      64 Processing:    93  613 195.9    617    1160 Waiting:       71  522 170.8    514    1052 Total:        104  640 194.4    640    1169 Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)   50%    640   66%    696   75%    725   80%    775   90%    865   95%   1003   98%   1163   99%   1169  100%   1169 (longest request)

Without PHP-FPM


With PHP-FPM


It seems website is more faster with PHP-FPM.

Sorry, one correction beacause I cannot modify my post:

server1: RHEL 7.4, CentOS WebPanel, PHP 7.0.20, MariaDB, Apache 2.4.6 & Varnish Cache & Nginx Reverse Proxy

server2: RHEL 7.4, ISPConfig, PHP FPM 7.1.8, MariaDB, Apache 2.4.6

I have a question, why did you used different version of php for testing and have you configured varnish for your site before ?

Okay, I will make test with the same versions, but all we know that the php-fpm is faster. Also Varnish and Nginx proxy reverse doesn't matter at this time, because I make tests on port 443 which is https:// and this port is listen directly by Apache:

tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:80              0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN      27658/varnishd     
tcp        0      0 192.168.1.102:82        0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN      17213/nginx: master
tcp        0      0 127.0.0.1:6082          0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN      27658/varnishd     
tcp6       0      0 :::80                   :::*                    LISTEN      27658/varnishd     
tcp6       0      0 :::8181                 :::*                    LISTEN      31255/httpd         
tcp6       0      0 :::443                  :::*                    LISTEN      31255/httpd         

then apache and php-cgi managed by suphp as handler where only on the cwp server.

Note that suphp is used with shared hosting servers as higher security level, other setups are less secure and they are for servers running only one site as in case of running more sites one hacked site will give a hacker access to the  all other sites more easy.

Since CWP is designed for shared hosting servers I like more to have higher security, however for those having only 1-2 sites on the server they probably want to have some higher performances and that should be as additional option...this will probably come soon as now new CWP was released.