Thanks for all the help guys :-) On Fri, Feb 8, 2008 at 7:15 PM, Baz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now that's what I would have to disagree with. > > Who really cares if CI pulls up the static page faster than Cake? I don't > see the point in testing something that your application isn't going to be > reflecting. Heck, we might as well slap on a .HTML file than benchmark that > too. > > I think you'd need to design the same basic application across all your > platforms and test that. > > Also, by definition, benchmarking requires some sort of comparison. Hence > the multiple platforms. > > > On Feb 8, 2008 11:00 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > There are a bunch of performance comparisons out there. Most may not > > me very relevant in a real world project but if you need numbers here > > are a few: > > > > http://paul-m-jones.com/blog/?p=236 > > http://www.sellersrank.com/php/cakephp-codeigniter-benchmark/ > > > > Note: These try to test the most basic setup. > > > > > > > > On Feb 8, 5:04 pm, "Tom.Maiaroto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > ..oh and compared to other frameworks ?? > > > > > > you could try and build the same app over and over and profile them > > > all...but again it's gonna be hard and I would bet you'd get very > > > similar results anyway. > > > UNLESS you have some super huge monster of an app. That would be > > > interesting to see. > > > > > > Like others said, your development time is the most precious thing > > > that Cake can help you with. > > > > > > On Feb 8, 11:02 am, "Tom.Maiaroto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > You could setup xdebug or Zend and profile your site....but > > > > benchmarking is such a subjective thing. > > > > It relies a lot on your server setup, etc. > > > > > > > What you could do is say build your own blog - and load it up with > > the > > > > same articles as say an installation of Wordpress or something. Then > > > > profile both. > > > > See the difference. > > > > > > > BUT that's only going to get you so far. Your specific machine's > > > > PHP.ini, and other settings AND cpu speed/ram is different from the > > > > host you'll be on (most likely)...AND you're testing locally - not > > > > through the internet. > > > > > > > Now. A more accurate test would be to run the same test on the host > > > > you'll be at...but can you get xdebug or something like that setup > > on > > > > your host? > > > > > > > Also, you've just gone through a bunch of time to find out if you > > can > > > > build an application faster than Wordpress or Drupal or Joomla! or > > > > whatever. > > > > > > > My bet, you did build one faster...because all those systems load > > > > extra things you probably don't have when you build a custom > > solution. > > > > > > > These CMS' out there try to cover all the bases best they can. That > > > > means a lot of overhead. A custom solution is -usually- going to be > > > > faster. > > > > > > > Plus it's super hard to test for this anyway given all the > > variables. > > > > Just know that CakePHP has some really great scalability and > > > > performance options with many different ways to cache data, VERY > > good > > > > control over your queries, and along with the design pattern and > > such > > > > it's really efficient for OO PHP...you just have to be sure you're > > > > writing efficient code... ie. be aware of your findAll's and what > > > > you're bringing back...do you need it all? Be aware of your custom > > > > functions and special operations that you're using, etc. > > > > > > > In my opinion - Cake's the best thing since sliced bread for web > > apps. > > > > > > > On Feb 8, 9:20 am, MattC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Regarding Zoe's comment about Cake checking the db columns every > > time > > > > > you retrieve data, that only happens when debug is on. Otherwise > > the > > > > > table schema is cached. > > > > > > > > In general you should look into Cake's built in caching which can > > > > > negate a lot of the framework overhead. Here is quick test I did > > to > > > > > benchmark the improvement with cache turned on: > > http://www.pseudocoder.com/archives/2007/02/27/cakephp-cache-performa... > > > > > > > > That was almost a year ago and used Cake 1.1 with file based > > caching. > > > > > > > > -Mattwww.pseudocoder.com > > > > > > > > On Feb 8, 6:26 am, Ma'moon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello guys, > > > > > > i am truly sure that cake is my choice when it comes to choose a > > framework > > > > > > from the bunch of frameworks available out there but i really > > need to see > > > > > > some benchmarks in order to convince my managers that cake is > > really for it > > > > > > and it would be our best choice, is there any benchmarks reports > > available, > > > > > > i would be thankful for any links being posted here or pointed > > anywhere > > > > > > else. > > > > > > > > > Regards, Ma'moon > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cake PHP" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
