OpenLiteSpeed Wordpress

[MooCloud_Matt]

Here's a progress update:

• The application will be released with a slightly old PHP version: lsphp72 (PHP 7.2).
  For various reasons, but we will offer various versions of OLS with the various versions of PHP 7.x later this year.

• The access key to LiteSpeed cloud services (QUIC.cloud) can be requested manually, for MooCloud customers it will be done automatically.

• The OLS web admin console is accessible by setting port 7080 after the domain; the user/password credentials must be changed after installation, through a terminal script.
  This is not necessary for MooCloud customers.

• Any modification to the .htaccess file requires a complete restart of the container, MooCloud customers will have a special function on EasyManager to load the new .htaccess into the OLS cache, which does not require a restart.

As you can see, there are secondary functions available only for our customers, this not because we want to limit the image, but because it requires an external intervention via API or CLI that our system is able to do independently, to eneble this features.

[MooCloud_Matt]

Hello everyone!

for the OpenLiteSpeed webadmin we are facing some issue with the HTTPs connection, for what the CloudronManifest's limitation are write now, we can't use NginxProxy to fwd(proxy_pass) the connection to port 7080 on the container.

So we use the "tcpPorts" module, and generate the certificate during the image build, but is not safe and it will give issue with chrome and firefox, you need to access the webadmin with Private/incognito.

@girish
do you have suggestion?

[girish]

@MooCloud_Matt That's an interesting problem. Does OLS have no configuration to serve up the admin panel is a custom path like say _admin ? If that's not possible, I can only think of fixing Cloudron's manifest.

For example, maybe like tcpPorts, we can have httpPorts that then provisions with the TLS certificate but with a port on the same domain. Would something like that work?

[MooCloud_Matt]

@girish
this is the biggest issue that we are facing because it seam that webadmin and normal ols are separate process, and as OLS call separate "listener".
And u can't forward / rewrite a call easy from one to the other, we only able to do that is we install the proxy module in front of port 80 and 7080, but this mean that we will have 2 proxy before wordpress (Nginx+ OLS)

[girish]

Yeah, it's not ideal to have two proxies before hitting wordpress.

I can try adding a field in the manifest to specify additional http ports in the next release. That should sort out this issue.

[MooCloud_Matt]

@girish
or possibility to add like a proxy_pass to a path, example: wordpress.domain.ch/ols_admin --> container:7080

[girish]

@MooCloud_Matt Right. I do prefer the path based approach you mention instead of wordpress.domain.ch:7080.

[MooCloud_Matt]

@girish
me to, its cleaner as solution, and more flexible for future app too (minecraft for exemple)

[MooCloud_Matt]

hello everyone,
I wanted to update you on the status on OLS.
In agreement with @girish the application will not be published on the store because it will be released with a open source license, but which prohibits its use by MSP or Managed Hosting Provider; and because themselves cannot guarantee support on the app.
In all cases we are working together to ensure that the Apps developed by MooCloud will be available in the store sooner or later.

As soon as the custom proxy_pass support is added to the manifest we will release the application to the public downloadable from our docker registry.

[girish]

Currently, all packages our our store are maintained by us and we provide the support as well (to the best we can). We don't have a mechanism for 3rd party packages. We need to have a way to show/mark this in the UI as well as inform the user accordingly of the support expectations. If people have ideas, we are happy to consider this. Please open a separate thread though in the feature requests category, so that we don't derail this OLS thread

[marcusquinn]

From a UI point of view, maybe keep App Store as your supported Managed Apps and have separate section, maybe just called "3rd Party"

Maybe an "Add Repositories" button to add Gitlab Group or Repo URLs?

[micmc]

@girish How about embeding it with Unmanaged WP installation as of with redis? Is this something that could be done?

I personally totally agree with not messing too much with third parties packages from cloudron box, especially as, indeed, you'd have no control on future devs of such outsider apps and thus no control on the outcomes. I believe what you are doing already is extraordinary imho so as some say "if a thing works well, don't f.... try to 'fix' the thing..." lol

[MooCloud_Matt]

@micmc
But will mean that OLS and all the apps that we are working on will be available only for Moocloud customer.
If you want there is a post on that, If u want to discuss with us.

[mikulabc]

What's the status here guys? I came here wanting to use cloudron wp with OLS, anyway we can get this online?

[girish]

@mikulabc Currently, @MooCloud_Matt wants to keep the package exclusive to their customers. Maybe we (cloudron team) will package it for all our customers at some point once we get enough votes for this app.

[ruihildt]

I'm a bit disappointed as I don't think this was mentioned in any previous public discussions on the subject.

@MooCloud_Matt Would you consider sharing your code with the community? I'm not sure anyone here is directly competing with your business to be honest.^^

[marcusquinn]

Having been through a of of WP performance testing and comparison in the past, including OLS, I really wouldn't feel your missing out, as we neither managed to get performance as good as standard Nginx & Apache, and it really didn't seem either broadly known by devs or any more than just good default settings that can be done and more with Nginx & Apache anyway.

Long story short, I don't think anyone is missing out without this as the Cloudron WP stack is already very good, and any performance issues are more than likely with the codebase running on whatever stack, and within that most likely sql query efficiencies in certain plugins that tend to only show themselves slow when you add content.

First think I recommend everyone should try is disable open_basedir, it was one of the simplest and most impactful changes we made for the least effort.

We also use a technique similar to that offered with this plugin for only loading what's needed to render each page, before any caching:

• https://codecanyon.net/item/deactivate-plugins-per-page-improve-wordpress-performance/23801359

Gonzales or Clearfy Asset Manager does similar things - but like all these things, you need to know or at least bear in mind what you're doing as whenever you unload things you create debugging blindspots:

• https://wordpress.org/plugins/gonzales/
• https://clearfy.pro/assets-manager/

If, after all of that optimisation, you still think OLS is needed, there's no harm in trying other than time but I suspect most will finds that OLS won't help with performance as much as optimising what is asked of the server by the app first.

[girish]

I haven't done extensive testing with OLS, but to add to what @marcusquinn said, the main speed benefits come from caching (which OLS does by default). With WP, if you install WP Super Cache or equivalent, you get very good numbers on Cloudron. It's on my list to investigate integrating Super Cache or something as the default. But these caches always have some corner cases where you have to click the "clear cache" button manually and then we have to inform users about all this. This is why we have left the choice to the user for now.

[marcusquinn]

@girish Agreed - see caching as more of a problem than a solution, and it usually masks more problems than it solves. Caching is for scaling traffic but full-page caching can't help with dynamic content.

I can't say we have all the solutions but we have been down the road of trying so many solutions and always come back to the fundamentals that it's the quality of the plugins used and their query efficiency that has the most impact, and we focus on WP Admin speed foremost because that's generally heavier and slower, so if we get that right the front-end is usually fine.

[MooCloud_Matt]

@marcusquinn
Hey Marcus,

yes and no, OLS/LS is objectively more efficient over apache, and this make it more performant then apache.
Berceuse as Nginx it can serve static file without wake up a php, that apache is using for every request on a WP.
But as i already say sometimes a good server lvl optimization of nginx is performing as well but is not easy to setup, OLS or LS offer LSCache to do all the config from WP dashboard.

WP plugin are not the best way to go, because they just let the call be managed by a PHP, many like Cache enabler, just create a HTML copy of the website, that is more performant no elaboration needed by db or php, but if you use apache you will wake up PHP anyway so CPU and RAM wasted.

@ruihildt
We are in Open Beta for OLS, if you want we can provide you the image.
But for now the code is closed sourse, it will be realise with a custom licenses that is open source but not commercially usable by MSP or ISP to offer WordPress as a Service or PaaS.