Re: performance: large includes vs small includes with lots of reads

On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:41:10 -0500 (CDT), Hans H. Anderson <email@hansanderson.com> wrote: > I'm trying to tweak my server a bit and wonder if it is better to have a large > include file, say 20-40 kb with 15 user-defined functions, of which maybe 3 or 4 > are used on any given page, or to have each function in it's own file and > include (disk access/read) them only as needed. > > Is it faster/more efficient to read one large file or several smaller ones? > It's a RS Linux server with a gig of memory. > > I'm also looking at PHP Accelerator and such. Do those store only in memory > what the script needs, or does it include all that you require or include in, as > well? With sufficient ram, the OS will likely cache a lot of the file reads anyway, so with files that small it shouldn't make a whole lot of difference. But like I always say, the best way to know is to try it both ways and benchmark it. -- Greg Donald Zend Certified Engineer http://gdconsultants.com/ http://destiney.com/