Re: Speed/Performance
| From: | Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams | Date: | Fri, 15 Dec 2000 22:45:53 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Speed/Performance | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-dev+get-41525@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000 szii@sziisoft.com wrote:
> We're running some speed trials right now, and seeing that .php files
> are taking considerably longer even if they have NO <?php ?> tags.
> They're static pages, but by having the extension they're running slower
> do to the parser running through them.
>
> Does anyone have any "performance" tips for PHP files? Caches that
> aren't turned on by default?
>
> Here are the ones I know:
> Compile into Apache, not as a DSO
> Lots O RAM
> Don't use "known php extensions" for non-php files.
>
> We're taking a single-CPU client running a multithreaded app.
> It spawns X threads each of which open a socket, requests a
> file, and shuts down the socket.
>
> At 100 threads we're choking the server (K6 233) and not
> even touching the client's CPU usage. We're also deep
> into VM/swap space, even at 192 MB RAM. This is quite
> obviously not our production server (cringe at the thought).
> We're just "playing" with this one.
>
> Any one have more ideas? 2.4 kernel with khttpd? Won't affect
> PHP, but could make static pages faster...
>
> TIA
>
> -Szii
>
You should also be looking at making the Apache binary as small as possible:
1) Disable any PHP extensions you don't need.
2) Disable any Apache DSOs you don't need (mod_autoindex, mod_include,
mod_speling[sic], mod_perl, etc.).
The RAM drive is also a good idea, you beat me to it :).
Most server-caliber operating systems already have file-based caching, so the
require()/include() stuff is dealt with. It uses a lot more than 10MB
sometimes, though.
--
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ignacio@openservices.net>