Hello, I was told that it is more efficient to execute cached scripts then to execute non-cached optimized scripts. Can anybody comment on this?
What happens is that it seems that Zend Cache alternatives prevent Zend Optimizer to optimize the scripts before executing them. Since either Zend Optimizer and Zend Cache alternatives are free, I was wondering what is more efficient speedwise it typical PHP Web page scripts and also memory wise. Has anybody tested Zend Cache and the free alternatives to draw some concluding comparision? I would also appreciate Zeev/Andi comments on this if you have some time to comment. I assume you had time to check the free alternatives to your products. I would not mind if your comments are somehow biased towards your products as long as you present technical facts. Thanks. Manuel Lemos -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
