Questions nginx and moving a huge gallery from IP.Gallery Questions nginx and moving a huge gallery from IP.Gallery
 

News:

cpg1.5.48 Security release - upgrade mandatory!
The Coppermine development team is releasing a security update for Coppermine in order to counter a recently discovered vulnerability. It is important that all users who run version cpg1.5.46 or older update to this latest version as soon as possible.
[more]

Main Menu

Questions nginx and moving a huge gallery from IP.Gallery

Started by beentold, July 24, 2010, 01:36:14 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1
User actions

beentold

July 24, 2010, 01:36:14 PM
Hi there,
at the moment I am using IP.Gallery (with IP.Board) and we have a huge gallery with over 12GB of images. I am moving to a new vserver with nginx to improve performance over apache.

Someone told me that Coppermine Gallery might be a better alternative for big galleries. What are your experiences with Coppermine and huge galleries? Does it perform well? Has someone ever made the switch from IP.Gallery and can tell me about their experiences?

Also, is Coppermine Gallery able to run on nginx? If yes, can anyone tell me about their experience running it on nginx?

beentold

#1
July 26, 2010, 05:18:46 PM
Did I put this in the wrong forum? So many views and no replies. :( Not trying to moan or anything. Just wondering.

phill104

#2
July 26, 2010, 06:16:51 PM
It is possibly because none of us has used the setup you describe. Galleries of that size are not normally a problem on a good server. It all depends on so many factors that we cannot really give you the answers you need. There are no physical limits to the amount of images Coppermine can handle, it is all down to the limits of the system it is placed upon.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes.

beentold

#3
July 26, 2010, 07:34:58 PM
I guess my main question is: how efficient is Coppermine in terms of using the available resources? My impression is that IP.Board and its IP.Gallery are not very efficient at all (which surprised me).

phill104

#4
July 26, 2010, 07:42:00 PM
If you configure it in an optimal way then it is very efficient. It all depends on what features you use. For instance, and I am certain you are aware of this, if you expect your server to resize large images en mass, add watermarks, log everything etc then it will consume more server resources. If configured well coppermine does a very good job of keeping server load to a minimum and has proved itself on hundreds of thousands of websites.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes.

beentold

#5
July 26, 2010, 07:44:51 PM
I know what you mean... I guess the proof of the pudding is in the eating. I'll just have to try and see how it goes. Is there a converter/importer for IP.Gallery to Coppermine?

Αndré

#6
September 03, 2010, 04:45:13 PM
Quote from: beentold on July 26, 2010, 07:44:51 PM
Is there a converter/importer for IP.Gallery to Coppermine?
I'm not aware of one, but I never asked Google ;)
Print
Go Up Pages1
User actions