Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:38461 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 54255 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2008 13:56:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 20 Jun 2008 13:56:27 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ilia@prohost.org; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ilia@prohost.org; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain prohost.org from 209.85.198.230 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ilia@prohost.org X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.198.230 rv-out-0506.google.com Received: from [209.85.198.230] ([209.85.198.230:31611] helo=rv-out-0506.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 4F/7A-16112-A07BB584 for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:56:26 -0400 Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id g37so6717370rvb.23 for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2008 06:56:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.122.20 with SMTP id z20mr7533320rvm.239.1213970182689; Fri, 20 Jun 2008 06:56:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.129? ( [76.65.228.201]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s27sm30222qbs.12.2008.06.20.06.56.14 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 20 Jun 2008 06:56:19 -0700 (PDT) Cc: internals Mailing List Message-ID: <42E636C4-BE02-477D-B04F-F894BA82C545@prohost.org> To: Gregory Beaver In-Reply-To: <485B5874.9000204@chiaraquartet.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v924) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:56:07 -0400 References: <485B5874.9000204@chiaraquartet.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.924) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] interesting update on phar performance From: ilia@prohost.org (Ilia Alshanetsky) Greg, Congrats, those are rather impressive results. On 20-Jun-08, at 3:12 AM, Gregory Beaver wrote: > Hi all, > > I decided to run my standard phpMyAdmin test without APC enabled and > got > startling results from siege: > > Date & Time, Trans, Elap Time, Data Trans, Resp Time, Trans > Rate, Throughput, Concurrent, OKAY, Failed > 2008-06-20 02:02:35, 915, 60.01, 1, 0.98, > 15.25, 0.02, 14.88, 915, 0 <-- phpMyAdmin on > disk > 2008-06-20 02:05:04, 911, 60.04, 1, 0.98, > 15.17, 0.02, 14.86, 911, 0 <-- phpMyAdmin in > phar > with phar.cache_list > > That's right - they are identical in performance. With APC, there > is a > performance difference (I'm not sure why, to be honest, this one is > really hard to profile): > > Date & Time, Trans, Elap Time, Data Trans, Resp Time, Trans > Rate, Throughput, Concurrent, OKAY, Failed > 2008-06-20 01:34:00, 2735, 59.72, 5, 0.33, > 45.80, 0.08, 14.95, 2735, 0 <-- phpMyAdmin on > disk > 2008-06-20 01:36:11, 2409, 60.14, 5, 0.37, > 40.06, 0.08, 14.95, 2409, 0 <-- phpMyAdmin in > phar > with phar.cache_list > > However, the difference is negligible. Thanks to Gopal for the > mini-tutorial on using copy-on-write to implement phar.cache_list, and > kcachegrind for finding the obvious bottlenecks. > > Greg > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > Ilia Alshanetsky