How can I cache a static site with Litespeed?
- Thread starter Émerson Felinto
- Start date
You may want to take a look at our blog post about microcache here: https://blog.litespeedtech.com/2017/11/01/wpw-friends-dont-let-friends-microcache/
With LiteSpeed there is no need to cache static files as they just get sent and have no bottlenecks like PHP slowing them down. The only way nginx helps with microcache and static files is when it is used as a reverse proxy, since it will have to hit backend to fetch everything. When running just LiteSpeed there is no bottleneck and everything is served even quicker out of the box than microcache for static pages. If you want to speed up Dynamic PHP pages you will really want to looking into our LSCache solution especially if you run WordPress as we have a very good All-In-One solution for WordPress with intelligent based caching, browser caching, image optimization, cdn support, and much much more.
With LiteSpeed there is no need to cache static files as they just get sent and have no bottlenecks like PHP slowing them down. The only way nginx helps with microcache and static files is when it is used as a reverse proxy, since it will have to hit backend to fetch everything. When running just LiteSpeed there is no bottleneck and everything is served even quicker out of the box than microcache for static pages. If you want to speed up Dynamic PHP pages you will really want to looking into our LSCache solution especially if you run WordPress as we have a very good All-In-One solution for WordPress with intelligent based caching, browser caching, image optimization, cdn support, and much much more.
I have read this article for some time and understand the opinion of the author of the post. But in my case where LSCache has no effect it has no use for me. It's no use having all these features if my clients just do not use because of the plugin's complexity !!!
You say that the Litespeed engine is better than Nginx + Microcache. Could you tell me more about this or tell me why this happens?
You say that the Litespeed engine is better than Nginx + Microcache. Could you tell me more about this or tell me why this happens?
RE: LSCWP's complexity, would Basic View help your clients with this? It essentially strips away all of the optimization settings and leaves only the most basic LSCache settings behind. Users only have to "enable" and then ignore the rest.
Maybe the fact that the plugin is not translated into my language (Brazilian Portuguese) is one of the main reasons that cause this discomfort to my clients.
Before I met Litespeed I bought the WP Fastest Cache Premium license and distributed it to all my clients. Among the main advantages of it I can mention:
- Very easy setup. Checking all the checkboxes on the home screen gives a great result for 90% of the sites.
- Plugin translated into Portuguese from Brazil.
- Option to activate the CDN Photon (free) which greatly reduces the use of my clients bandwidth.
Although it has achieved better results with the Litespeed Cache plugin, it is simply very difficult to convince my clients to use this plugin in view of the ease it offers. So I feel like throwing money away.
Before I met Litespeed I bought the WP Fastest Cache Premium license and distributed it to all my clients. Among the main advantages of it I can mention:
- Very easy setup. Checking all the checkboxes on the home screen gives a great result for 90% of the sites.
- Plugin translated into Portuguese from Brazil.
- Option to activate the CDN Photon (free) which greatly reduces the use of my clients bandwidth.
Although it has achieved better results with the Litespeed Cache plugin, it is simply very difficult to convince my clients to use this plugin in view of the ease it offers. So I feel like throwing money away.
Ah. I understand. If I saw several pages of buttons in a language I didn't understand, that would be a stumbling block for me, too. (You wouldn't want to help translate, would you?)
The fact is, for many WordPress sites, the default settings for LSCache are sufficient. This means: you can install it, activate it, and then press one button to enable caching. And that is it!
We've tried to get this point across by creating Basic View, and by writing a Beginner's Guide, but perhaps these measures are insufficient when language is a barrier. If you have any suggestions as to how we can make the interface less overwhelming, feel free to share.
RE: CDN, we do have CDN integration, but I imagine setup might not be easy for those who don't read English.
RE: "throwing money away," I'm not sure what you are referring to. The WP plugin is free. Are you saying that you do not already have a LiteSpeed Web Server license w/LSCache enabled?
The fact is, for many WordPress sites, the default settings for LSCache are sufficient. This means: you can install it, activate it, and then press one button to enable caching. And that is it!
We've tried to get this point across by creating Basic View, and by writing a Beginner's Guide, but perhaps these measures are insufficient when language is a barrier. If you have any suggestions as to how we can make the interface less overwhelming, feel free to share.
RE: CDN, we do have CDN integration, but I imagine setup might not be easy for those who don't read English.
RE: "throwing money away," I'm not sure what you are referring to. The WP plugin is free. Are you saying that you do not already have a LiteSpeed Web Server license w/LSCache enabled?
Do not get me wrong. I really want to support the community but that would take a lot of my time and effort. Would Litespeed help me by paying my license? 
Currently I consider WP Fastest Cache as the best cache plugin in view that is very simple to use and brings an incredible benefit.
Do you have plans to integrate with CDN Photon? In addition to this free CDN delivers the images to .WebP automatically!
I already hired the Litespeed license with LSCache. But I saw that it's the same as throwing money away. What's the point of having multiple if none of my clients use it?
Currently I consider WP Fastest Cache as the best cache plugin in view that is very simple to use and brings an incredible benefit.
Do you have plans to integrate with CDN Photon? In addition to this free CDN delivers the images to .WebP automatically!
I already hired the Litespeed license with LSCache. But I saw that it's the same as throwing money away. What's the point of having multiple if none of my clients use it?
Hello,
As you may have seen in the official documentation you can use the CDN Photon without the plugin. To activate it is simple, just put "i0.wp.com" or "i1.wp.com or" i2.wp.com or "i3.wp.com" at the beginning of the image:
https://www.litespeedtech.com/images/line_art/web-server.png
https://i0.wp.com/www.litespeedtech.com/images/line_art/web-server.png
It is worth remembering that if the original image is in .WebP format the CDN will refuse to offer an "optimized" version.
As you may have seen in the official documentation you can use the CDN Photon without the plugin. To activate it is simple, just put "i0.wp.com" or "i1.wp.com or" i2.wp.com or "i3.wp.com" at the beginning of the image:
https://www.litespeedtech.com/images/line_art/web-server.png
https://i0.wp.com/www.litespeedtech.com/images/line_art/web-server.png
It is worth remembering that if the original image is in .WebP format the CDN will refuse to offer an "optimized" version.
Here is how WPFC serves the images directly from CDN Photon. Really, there is no secret!
https://pastebin.com/8B3cBAxz
https://pastebin.com/8B3cBAxz
Yes, I configure it manually on my sites. But how will my customers know that? Also remember that CDN Photon will conflict with Litespeed image optimization because my clients are unaware that CDN Photon does not accept images that are already optimized in .WebP.
As I said, Litespeed compared to other cache plugins and due to its integration with the web server is what represents better results. But if none of my clients wants to use it, it's simply a waste of resources.
As I said, Litespeed compared to other cache plugins and due to its integration with the web server is what represents better results. But if none of my clients wants to use it, it's simply a waste of resources.
I understand. But short of writing clear documentation and detailed blog posts, I'm not sure how to convince anyone to switch. It's difficult to overcome the comfort of familiarity, even if the solution being offered is a technically better one!
We will continue to look at ways to simplify the interface. And in the meantime, if you have any suggestions, feel free to share them anytime. Thanks!
We will continue to look at ways to simplify the interface. And in the meantime, if you have any suggestions, feel free to share them anytime. Thanks!
I really believe it's a bad idea to rely on documentation or blog articles. I've read some articles from you and they seem to try to keep up with both the beginner and advanced audiences. This is great but I really doubt that my client will research about it. Another problem is that extensive documentation also requires translation into multiple languages in the future. Perhaps efforts should be focused on improving the plugin's interface. Just leave the documentation to solve problems, because if the plugin at any time generate any error output the client can search on Google and find the answer quickly. I once had a problem while trying to enable mobile caching:
https://www.litespeedtech.com/support/forum/threads/litespeed-cache-conflicting-with-the-amp.15904/
I researched a solution and had not found any tutorial on the internet on the subject being that I needed to create a topic in this forum to ask for help. So I ask you, if I am the server administrator I get confused sometimes with multiple terms, can you imagine my clients?
Well, you asked for suggestions, so here are my suggestions.
A plugin that has a great navigation interface besides the WP Fastest Cache is the Swift Performance:
https://ps.w.org/swift-performance-lite/assets/screenshot-2.png?rev=1816165
Why do not you implement such an assistant in Litespeed Cache? See the possibility of a user to implement the CDN Photon via Litespeed, which would decrease the bandwidth and allow my server to process more requests.
https://ps.w.org/litespeed-cache/assets/screenshot-2.png?rev=1814210
Most plugin settings are ON / OFF with a brief technical description below. Do you really think my clients are interested in this? Instead of this technical description could you put more descriptive names (starting with verbs maybe?) And put a little help link in case the user wants to know more technical information. In the print below I did a little simulation of how it would be more or less. I did not do anything sophisticated because of the length of this comment.
Take a look at the Jetpack interface as well:
https://www.shoutmeloud.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Enable-disable-Jetpack-plugin-module.png
Anyway, that's it. I hope that in the future the Litespeed panel can improve and be more user friendly.
I think that in the future through 1 click I will be able to install Litespeed Cache for all my users and they will be surprised when I access wp-admin with a great welcome screen saying something like "Welcome to your new cache plugin ". And they'll be able to enjoy a colorful and vivid panel with lots of interesting stats showing how much feature the Litespeed Cache plugin spared (equal to the cloudflare status page). As long as these changes are not made unfortunately I do not see a big benefit on Litespeed.
I hope you enjoy my feedback and take into consideration the new versions of the plugin.
https://www.litespeedtech.com/support/forum/threads/litespeed-cache-conflicting-with-the-amp.15904/
I researched a solution and had not found any tutorial on the internet on the subject being that I needed to create a topic in this forum to ask for help. So I ask you, if I am the server administrator I get confused sometimes with multiple terms, can you imagine my clients?
Well, you asked for suggestions, so here are my suggestions.
A plugin that has a great navigation interface besides the WP Fastest Cache is the Swift Performance:
https://ps.w.org/swift-performance-lite/assets/screenshot-2.png?rev=1816165
Why do not you implement such an assistant in Litespeed Cache? See the possibility of a user to implement the CDN Photon via Litespeed, which would decrease the bandwidth and allow my server to process more requests.
https://ps.w.org/litespeed-cache/assets/screenshot-2.png?rev=1814210
Most plugin settings are ON / OFF with a brief technical description below. Do you really think my clients are interested in this? Instead of this technical description could you put more descriptive names (starting with verbs maybe?) And put a little help link in case the user wants to know more technical information. In the print below I did a little simulation of how it would be more or less. I did not do anything sophisticated because of the length of this comment.
Take a look at the Jetpack interface as well:
https://www.shoutmeloud.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Enable-disable-Jetpack-plugin-module.png
Anyway, that's it. I hope that in the future the Litespeed panel can improve and be more user friendly.
I think that in the future through 1 click I will be able to install Litespeed Cache for all my users and they will be surprised when I access wp-admin with a great welcome screen saying something like "Welcome to your new cache plugin ". And they'll be able to enjoy a colorful and vivid panel with lots of interesting stats showing how much feature the Litespeed Cache plugin spared (equal to the cloudflare status page). As long as these changes are not made unfortunately I do not see a big benefit on Litespeed.
I hope you enjoy my feedback and take into consideration the new versions of the plugin.