Comments on: Performance Tuning Overview http://blog.digitalstruct.com/2008/01/31/performance-tuning-overview/ Getting inside the mind of a php developer. Wed, 09 Jul 2008 01:57:32 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Mike Willbanks http://blog.digitalstruct.com/2008/01/31/performance-tuning-overview/#comment-38742 Mike Willbanks Sun, 24 Feb 2008 05:13:40 +0000 http://blog.digitalstruct.com/2008/01/31/performance-tuning-overview/#comment-38742 @TuxLives - The answer is relatively simple here. If you are already including all of those files and/or functions to include them you are already incurring that overhead except, slightly more overhead since it also takes the hit from disk. This becomes easier to see when you are including a bunch of files from a framework. Since PHP is not compiled, you are actually having to include those files on each and every request. For one of my installations of the Zend Framework it is including up to 85 files. Reducing this to 1-3 files speeds up the site drastically. However, this is a little tricky as you have to work out all of the dependencies so that if class b implements class a you have to include class a first (something you can't easily do with get_required_files() function. Each individual benchmark would be considerably different since you may have more or less functions than ones that would be tested or more or less files with class definitions. What I attempt to do, is to group the common ones I utilize on every request into a single file and then deal with the rest on a one off basis. @TuxLives -
The answer is relatively simple here. If you are already including all of those files and/or functions to include them you are already incurring that overhead except, slightly more overhead since it also takes the hit from disk.

This becomes easier to see when you are including a bunch of files from a framework. Since PHP is not compiled, you are actually having to include those files on each and every request. For one of my installations of the Zend Framework it is including up to 85 files. Reducing this to 1-3 files speeds up the site drastically. However, this is a little tricky as you have to work out all of the dependencies so that if class b implements class a you have to include class a first (something you can’t easily do with get_required_files() function.

Each individual benchmark would be considerably different since you may have more or less functions than ones that would be tested or more or less files with class definitions. What I attempt to do, is to group the common ones I utilize on every request into a single file and then deal with the rest on a one off basis.

]]> By: TuxLives http://blog.digitalstruct.com/2008/01/31/performance-tuning-overview/#comment-38668 TuxLives Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:54:12 +0000 http://blog.digitalstruct.com/2008/01/31/performance-tuning-overview/#comment-38668 I have yet to see a good comment/test around reducing include calls and function overhead. IE: By including all functions in one file, you make only one call to the filesystem to include it, but you are not instantiating all those functions (which you may or may not need). I'd love to know what is the crossover point? I have yet to see a good comment/test around reducing include calls and function overhead.

IE: By including all functions in one file, you make only one call to the filesystem to include it, but you are not instantiating all those functions (which you may or may not need).

I’d love to know what is the crossover point?

]]> By: Mike Willbanks http://blog.digitalstruct.com/2008/01/31/performance-tuning-overview/#comment-38576 Mike Willbanks Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:28:56 +0000 http://blog.digitalstruct.com/2008/01/31/performance-tuning-overview/#comment-38576 @Guti - The Turck MMCache's last release was 2003-11-04. In December of 2004 the project was forked by eAccelerator. @Guti -
The Turck MMCache’s last release was 2003-11-04. In December of 2004 the project was forked by eAccelerator.

]]>