RE: [PHP] PHP compared to JSP

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 are getting 100 pages/sec on your database, you could cache it for 5 seconds and you save 500 accesses to your database. Yeah the page would be at most 5 seconds old but no one would know. Plus if you are a crappy programmer then it would mask how slow your code is :-) -----Original Message----- From: Miguel Cruz [mailto:mnc@stoic.net] Sent: May 5, 2002 3:01 AM To: Pag Cc: Luc Saint-Elie; php-general@lists.php.net 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 I mean, information may get a bit out of date if we 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. miguel -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php