Thanks Yigit
See comments below

Thanks Gunter,

The main reason for using Relevanssi for me was a speed improvement (where the SKU is included in the search). Relevanssi creates its own search index which helps keep the lookups quick.

I now have a couple of extremely large woocommerce sites with Enfold that are all running extremely smoothly so Relevanssi is a natural progression to improve search.

Hi Gunter,

The filter works as expected when the standard search layout is used – but has thrown another problem.
Please add the filter it is a good solution.

I have customised the searchform.php file adding:
<input type=”hidden” name=”post_type” value=”product”>
into the <form> tags.

This is causing the search to show different results to the ajax search.
Any idea how I can bring the two into alignment?

The search query changes from
/?s=samsung
to
/?s=samsung&post_type=product

Hi Gunter,

That works. But the theme developer is suggesting a better way to do this.
https://wordpress.org/support/topic/limit-ajax-search-to-5-posts/#post-16938764

Although this works
It means the Ajax search results are a lot less accurate so it isnt perfect but at least it gives much better control over the ajax and increases the speed.
Setting this to 25-50 seems to improve the search accuracy on the site I am using it on.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 4 months ago by thinkjarvis.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 4 months ago by thinkjarvis.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 4 months ago by thinkjarvis.

Thanks Gunter,

See below

Thanks Gunter,

Works as expected:

The working filters are below for functions.php

For other users comment out the lines that you dont want to remove.

NOTE If you comment out default – It causes a PHP error. So please keep default enabled.

// remove unused woo filters
add_filter( 'avf_wc_product_order_dropdown_frontend', 'thinkjarvis_remove_sorting_option_woocommerce_shop' );
function thinkjarvis_remove_sorting_option_woocommerce_shop( $product_order ) {
	unset( $product_order['default'] );
	unset( $product_order['menu_order'] );
	unset( $product_order['title'] );
	unset( $product_order['price'] );
	unset( $product_order['date'] );
	unset( $product_order['popularity'] );
	unset( $product_order['rating'] );
	unset( $product_order['relevance'] );
	unset( $product_order['rand'] );
	unset( $product_order['id'] );
	return $product_order;
}

• This reply was modified 1 year, 5 months ago by thinkjarvis.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 5 months ago by thinkjarvis.

Hi Yigit,

Really sorry about this – I think it is down to the way the categories are being ordered in the database.

Caused by WPAllImport Plugin.
I think I am going to have to manually re-order the categories in a WooCommerce CSV and re-upload them in the correct order.
Removing all categories and adding them again is still causing them to list in the wrong order in the Category field.

I have no idea why. Even alphabetically the one it is picking shouldnt be the first!

I’ll do some more investigation work. But I now dont think it is caused by Enfold.
If I find anything that would lead me to suspect it is Enfold I’ll share more info on this post.

This appears to have solved the problem thanks Gunter.

I have moved on from Key CDN and it looks like I will be using Stack Path as my CDN partner for all sites on my servers that require it.

This fix will also apply to any Edge Caching setup. Thank you for providing a fix.

You may close this issue.

add_action('after_setup_theme', 'update_enfold_image_sizes');
	function update_enfold_image_sizes() {
add_image_size ('shop_thumbnail', 200, 0, false );
add_image_size ('shop_catalog', 450, 0, false);
add_image_size ('shop_gallery_thumbnail', 300, 0, false);
}

Found it.

I have a content partner providing imagery for thousands of products and they are all poorly cropped so i am trying to make it so that they will display correctly without having to be re-sized to a specific aspect ratio. I’ll share my solution on my other thread.

@mike totally forgot that I could do that thank you for getting back to me so soon!

I’ll go through the list and see if I can resolve the issue with shortcodes.js

I have a feeling that since the turn off animations on mobile devices was added as an option in Enfold > Performance – That this might be the cause of the issues I have encountered with the WP-Rocket official Enfold exclusions list. The instructions for Enfold have not changed for some time now and when I checked the line of code in shortcodes.js causing the issue it related to turning off mobile animcations.

Once I’ve done some testing I’ll update the ticket.

Thanks Gunter,

Happy New Year!

This problem will occur with all asset CDNs so really pleased with the fix above. Thank you for looking into this.

I’ll be looking at this again properly in a few weeks – Likely after 5.4 is launched.

My trial of Key CDN ends this week. I have decided to look for an alternative – The TTFB is actually a lot slower on the CDN resources than just using the server direct. I was also getting issues where KeyCDN refused to serve critical assets (Cache Miss) so I do not think it is the right solution at this stage. Moving on to Bunny CDN and Stack Path next. Trying to avoid CloudFlare because it is expensive at enterprise level.

I think I’ll end up using StackPath EdgeCaching or the new Bunny CDN Permacache. This means a copy of the entire site is held on their network not just static assets. Soves a cache miss problem and improves TTFB times globally because HTML gets cached. This is simillar to how CloudFlare works when used at DNS level. The irony is that my server here in the UK is outperforming a clients server over in America where they use WPEngine and CloudFlare. I get comparable global TTFB scores without a CDN – With the TTFB scores being much much better in the UK due to server location. So I do not think it is as good as people make out.

If after my trials I am still seeing cache misses and worse TTFB scores. I’ll just use something like AnyCast DNS to improve DNS resolution times instead and leave CDNs alone until I have a client who requires globally equal TTFB scores.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 11 months ago by thinkjarvis.