Hi,
I was thinking about this after the earlier discussions and was
wondering what people thought about phar? Would this improve
performance if you really needed it?
phar is a bit more complicated story... We'll be doing some work on
performance-testing phar too, but that'll take some time. F
Hi!
I was thinking about this after the earlier discussions and was
wondering what people thought about phar? Would this improve
performance if you really needed it?
phar is a bit more complicated story... We'll be doing some work on
performance-testing phar too, but that'll take some time. F
of phars is a whole other barrel of monkeys.
> -Original Message-
> From: Stanislav Malyshev [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 15 May 2008 23:56
> To: fw-general@lists.zend.com
> Subject: Re: [fw-general] Zend Loader performance - benchmark
>
> Hi!
>
> I&#x
al
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 8:23:19 AM
Subject: RE: [fw-general] Zend Loader performance - benchmark
Thx for the benchmarks :) I think there where earlier discussions on this and
the ZF team are working on their own set of benchmarks, it will be interesting
to see how all this compares.
Look
-general@lists.zend.com
Subject: Re: [fw-general] Zend Loader performance - benchmark
Hi!
I've run a benchmark loading 725 framework class files on 5.2 and 5.3 with and
without bytecode caching.
The benchmark uses list of 725 Framework classes and loads them one by one, via
require_once an
Stains,
Great benchmarking and awesome explanations. You are an EXPERT in this area!
Regards,
Shekar
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Stanislav Malyshev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I've run a benchmark loading 725 framework class files on 5.2 and 5.3 with
> and without bytecode cac
Hi!
I've run a benchmark loading 725 framework class files on 5.2 and 5.3
with and without bytecode caching.
The benchmark uses list of 725 Framework classes and loads them one by
one, via require_once and via Zend_Loader::loadClass. You can see the
files here: http://random-bits-of.info/fw-tes
-- Philip G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
(on Sunday, 11 May 2008, 10:59 PM -0500):
> I'm glad to hear things have improved. Now, don't get me wrong, I
> didn't say I was sold on the subject, but I did show some evidence
> showing the opposite being true. I would love to see an official Zend
> paper on
I'm glad to hear things have improved. Now, don't get me wrong, I didn't say
I was sold on the subject, but I did show some evidence showing the opposite
being true. I would love to see an official Zend paper on this.
Autoloading vs direct includes is a large debate, even at work, which I
would lo
Although I was (like you) under the impression that opcode caches couldn't
cache autoloaded classes, I'm more inclined to trust Matthew and Ralph
than a blog post from last December that doesn't have the test suite
available for download. Five months is a long time in Zend Framework
time; since th
-- Philip G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
(on Sunday, 11 May 2008, 12:25 PM -0500):
> On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> -- Philip G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> (on Sunday, 11 May 2008, 09:36 AM -0500):
> > There's arguments on both s
Philip G wrote:
>
> There's arguments on both sides of the fence on this one. I personally
> like
> having organization in my code, which is why I like the multi-file method
> and we can just use APC to speed up code execution. However, not everybody
> has that option, which runs into a problem.
On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> -- Philip G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> (on Sunday, 11 May 2008, 09:36 AM -0500):
> > There's arguments on both sides of the fence on this one. I personally
> like
> > having organization in my code, which is wh
-- Philip G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
(on Sunday, 11 May 2008, 09:36 AM -0500):
> There's arguments on both sides of the fence on this one. I personally like
> having organization in my code, which is why I like the multi-file method and
> we can just use APC to speed up code execution. However, no
There's arguments on both sides of the fence on this one. I personally like
having organization in my code, which is why I like the multi-file method
and we can just use APC to speed up code execution. However, not everybody
has that option, which runs into a problem. On top of that, you start
rely
Did you test it with opcode cache enabled?
It's true that lots of files are included and compiled, but that's what you
have APC for.
Karol
Łukasz Bandzarewicz wrote:
>
> Hi all!
>
> During simple profiling I noticed that Zend_Loader could consume 20-25% of
> execution time.
> It's quite obvi
Hi all!
During simple profiling I noticed that Zend_Loader could consume 20-25% of
execution time.
It's quite obvious, because ZF has to load lots of files, but..
have you ever wondering about compile ZF code. Something similar to
phpDoctrine's compile method
(http://www.phpdoctrine.org/documenta
17 matches
Mail list logo
