Satyam wrote:
for ($x=0;$x<1000;$x++) {
echo ' <tr><td>X is ' , $x , '</td></tr>';
}
This seems to be a hair faster. I extended the test to 10000 requests
(still concurrency 10) to make the test a little more reproducible:
echo str,var,str did 604.65 requests a second where <tr><td><?= $x
?></td></tr> did 599.63 requests a second. I also tried echo str . var .
str, and it came in at about 584.55 requests a second. printf("str %i
str",var) came out at 547.01 requests a second and printf("str %s
str",var) was only 452.03 requests a second.
Can you try and time that one so we have comparable results? This one
should be second best:
for ($x=0;$x<1000;$x++) {
echo "<tr><td>X is $x</td></tr>";
}
Approximately 330 (?!) requests a second for that one.
Back again to what would be 'longer', well, in your example, the whole
header, up to the loop itself should be faster if sent out of PHP.
Likewise, you could echo $buffer right after the loop, drop out of PHP
and send the footer as plain HTML. This, of course, is harder to time
since it happens only once. I admit though that I did time the
options I listed and on the 'dropping in and out of PHP' I'm relying
on the PHP manual ( see
http://www.php.net/manual/en/language.basic-syntax.php, the first
paragraph after the examples) and the source of the lexical scanner,
which supports that, though your numbers do contradict it. Interesting.
I'm not sure that my results would count as contradictory - I'm running
APC which would likely throw performance related numbers out of whack as
compared to out-of-the-box PHP.
Because of that, I wouldn't recommend anyone take my numbers too
seriously - they're just an example taken from my server: 1.8 GHz
SMP/1G/RAID5/Linux 2.6.17.7/Apache 2.2.3/PHP 5.1.6/APC 3.0.12p2. Anyone
else's results would probably vary widely.
jon
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
