Re: [PEPr] Comment on Caching::Cache_Shm

Hi Fabien, I tried your $options set and there's still a great performance gap between filesystem and sysvshm... My bench says now (cuncurrency level = 10, using the bundled bench.php with the two classes Cache_Lite Requests per second: 280.00 [#/sec] (mean) Cache_Shm Requests per second: 450.21 [#/sec] (mean) Cache_Shm is definitely more fast, BUT I must say that Cache_Lite is really more reliable and easy to port on various systems. Right now I'm trying to bench Cache_Shm on a Aix server and I'm getting a lot of problem with SysV IPC keys not defined, shared memory segm. full, etc.) - this stuff is still very very beta :-) Best regards, Luca Mariano > > > Fabien MARTY (http://pear.php.net/user/fab) has commented on the proposal for Caching::Cache_Shm. > > Comment: > > Hi, I'm the main author of Cache_Lite. > > Do you try to desactivate anticorruption tests (because you don't want to > use readControl, writeControl, fileLocking...) ? Because without them, > perfs will be better. > > Try another bench with this $options array giver to the Cache_Lite > constructor : > > $options = array( > (...) // your options here > fileLocking => false, > writeControl => false, > readControl => false, > fileNameProtection => false, > automaticSerialization => false, > automaticCleaningFactor => 0, > hashedDirectoryLevel => 0 > ); > > Proposal information: > http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=230 > > -- > Sent by PEPr, the automatic proposal system at > http://pear.php.net > -- Email.it, the professional e-mail, gratis per te: http://www.email.it/f Sponsor: Vuoi diventare un vero esperto sul Controllo di Gestione? Scopri come nella tua azienda puoi migliorare gli utili e ridurre le spese. Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=3214&d=20050318