Re: Zend Framework...where to start? -- don't.
| From: | Robert Cummings | Date: | Fri, 16 Jan 2009 08:26:05 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Zend Framework...where to start? -- don't. | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 | Groups: | php.general |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-general+get-286488@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Thu, 2009-01-15 at 23:54 -0500, Paul M Foster wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 04:20:16AM -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2009-01-14 at 21:17 -0500, Paul M Foster wrote:
> > >
> > > Incidentally, I would differ from the reviewer in the link above only in
> > > this respect: He maintains that every line of code adds time. While this
> > > is true, I believe it's the number of files which have to be opened
> > > which drags down framework numbers the most. When I wrote C code, the
> > > CPU would blaze through the actual code, but file opens and reads
> > > consumed far more time than in-memory code execution.
> >
> > Moot point if you're using an accelerator like eAccelerator or APC since
> > these cache the data in memory. Similarly, most operating systems cache
> > file reads also, so it's probably not as expensive without an
> > accelerator as you think either.
>
> Perhaps, but since much of the C code I've written is on Linux servers
> like those used by most of the hosting companies, and since I can't
> control whether they do or don't cache pages, my personal experience
> (and simple logic) guides me to believe file manipulation is far more
> time consuming than simple manipulation of strings, number and arrays.
A goo compile cache will take care of that if you tell it not to bother
checking for newer source files.
Cheers,
Rob.
--
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP