FastCGI Cache VS WP Super Cache or use Together?

FastCGI cache is faster than WP Super Cache because the latter uses .htaccess and and PHP itself to route the visitor to the cache (files). So before the visitors get to a hit on a cached page, WP Super Cache has to performance some logic both in the form of .htaccess (rewrites) and PHP itself (all WP plugins must use php). Whereas FastCGI uses compiled bindings that are fast and routes traffic directly to the cache.

Now, an HTTP cache like Varnish will always be faster than the two. That’s because you’re traveling one fewer hop down the stack to get to the data, which in the case of Varnish sits at the HTTP level as an HTML object and can be served hot.

So to illlustrate:

So to get to the:

FastCGI cache: Nginx -> FastCGI -> File

WP Super Cache cache: Nginx -> FastCGI -> PHP -> File

Varnish cache: HTTP

Heya,

Using WP Super Cache alongside FastCGI caching can be beneficial as they address different aspects of caching. FastCGI caches PHP script outputs at the server level, which reduces the load by avoiding repeated execution of PHP code. WP Super Cache, on the other hand, creates static HTML files from WordPress content, which can be served quickly to users.

If you are new to caching, starting with FastCGI might be sufficient. Adding WP Super Cache could provide additional optimizations and management features specific to WordPress, such as easier cache management and integration with WordPress plugins.

Regards