Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:89748
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.52 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5666CDDD.6030209@lsces.co.uk>
References: <56662437.5040508@lsces.co.uk>
	<ED195E5D-1F00-401B-86EA-2B8C81592A79@lerdorf.com>
	<27359E8F-2C04-416B-861D-C2C4C85E4C77@lerdorf.com>
	<5666CDDD.6030209@lsces.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 15:27:23 +0100
Message-ID: <CAH-PCH5Bk_QM0SkWFgVBM-NZiJC2aG3g0VVXMoX00y6fKjqPVA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk>
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1145bd10a92211052663c5f7
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Practical comparisons on PHP7
From: tyra3l@gmail.com (Ferenc Kovacs)

--001a1145bd10a92211052663c5f7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk> wrote:

> On 08/12/15 02:23, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> > Ah, I just checked. You have no opcache at all in your PHP 7 setup. And
> you have eaccelerator configured for PHP 5. So an opcode cached PHP 5 is
> only 10% faster than a completely unaccelerated PHP 7. That's pretty damn
> impressive!
>
> Gallery page with heavier load
>                      Execute  Memory   Queries  Database
> PHP5.4
> eaccelerator off ...   0.60s  10.14Mb   153      0.39s
> eaccelerator on  ...   0.49s  3.57Mb    153      0.39s
> PHP5.6
> TODO
> PHP7
> opcache off      ...   0.50s  7.00Mb    153      0.30s
> opcache on       ...   0.40s  2.00Mb    153      0.30s
>
> I'm still taking the 'twice as fast' claim with a pinch of salt, and I'm
> only seeing opcache is performing as well as eaccelorator, so the idea
> that PHP7 is an 'essential upgrade to improve performance' may have
> relevance with some applications, but for the average user simply
> upgrading the computer may have a better result?
>
> I'm still interested in the idea of improving async operations such as
> not having to wait for all database results until essential, and I'm a
> little curious why the database service time is so much shorter between
> 5 and 7 THAT is the major gain between versions. But I need to check if
> 'Execute' was the total or excludes the database element. I had thought
> it was the total as the 'Server Stats' also includes the percentage of
> time handing database queries. Since exactly the same database service
> is providing both they should be identical so something else is
> affecting that figure.
>
> Bottom line is that given the real world loading on my sites, the
> differences are probably in the noise of network transit times so not
> impressive at all :(
>
> --
> Lester Caine - G8HFL
> -----------------------------
> Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=3Dcontact
> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
> EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
> Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
I think you should simply get better instrumentation/benchmarking methods
before rushing your conclusions.
Usually it is also helps if others can reproduce your results either to
verify your claims or spot the mistakes causing the bogus results.

--=20
Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu

--001a1145bd10a92211052663c5f7--