Does anyone think caching should be built into php for it to edge out the competition?
(like what smarty is doing)

I mean a static page will always serve up faster then a dynamic one.  Also even if you 
getting 100 pages/sec on your database, you could cache it for 5 seconds and you save 
accesses to your database.  Yeah the page would be at most 5 seconds old but no one 

Plus if you are a crappy programmer then it would mask how slow your code is :-)

-----Original Message-----
From: Miguel Cruz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: May 5, 2002 3:01 AM
To: Pag
Cc: Luc Saint-Elie; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PHP] PHP compared to JSP

On Sat, 4 May 2002, Pag wrote:
>> Does PHP compile : NO
>> Does the user loading same page for 2nd time gets better response : YES
>> it can if caching is provided
> On a side not..isnt caching a bit like going against why PHP was built
> in the first place? I mean, information may get a bit out of date if we
> get a page on the cache instead of getting it "fresh" from the server.

Sometimes the developer knows how stale information can get before it
needs to be refreshed. An awful lot of pages fetched with GET args are
just straight-up retrievals from mostly-static databases, and can be
cached with impunity.

Also, there are other types of caching. On a multi-use machine that is
busy with other stuff but not getting a lot of web traffic, httpd may have
been paged out. And the PHP source file will be cached by the filesystem
for a while after being read, saving subsequent repeat visits the delay of
a disk operation.


PHP General Mailing List (
To unsubscribe, visit:

PHP General Mailing List (
To unsubscribe, visit:

Reply via email to