Hello,
On 06/15/2003 12:39 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:At 13:59 11/06/2003, Manuel Lemos wrote:
I guess they can't compare with what they can't afford to buy.
It's therefore nice that it's available for free 21-day evaluation on zend.com, isn't it? :)
I suppose that was not available when they started making those benchmarks.
It was, like all Zend products, since the very day they became available (January 23rd, 2001).
It makes sense comparing the performance the same features. They compare code caching + optimizing. Turck also does content caching. It is just not reflected in those charts because it is a recent feature.
It's a pointless discussion - the ZPS is a new name, and under this name, it always included content caching and compression features. By using this name (as opposed to explicitly specifying ZPS Accelerator Edition, or Zend Accelerator), the comparison was wrong. No biggy, but somewhat misleading.
If you learned the product, you'd see that it offers many things that cannot be offered by mod_gzip nor any dynamic content caching class available in PHP (not to mention it's a heck of a lot easier to use).
I would not be that sure.
It would be odd if you were sure, considering you haven't learned this product...
Anyway, since I am not interested in paying for ZPS I have not studied your products in depth to comment.
It would be nice and of minimal courtesy then, not to make statements that imply that you have a clear understanding of what you're talking about. It's not your obligation to study the product, obviously, but then, don't make comments about it that suggest that you know it.
So, I can't guess what you are implying with those "many things that cannot be offered by mod_gzip nor any dynamic content caching class".
Personally I can only comment on the caching class solution that I mentioned because I developed it to offload significantly one very busy site.
Of course, I wasn't trying to imply that your caching classes are useless, they're just much less powerful than what you can do with ZPS. The ZPS has caching facilities and allows complex dependencies that simply cannot be implemented in PHP's user space, no matter how bright a coder you may be. Most notably, its ability to work with alongside applications that make extensive use of sessions. In our experience, using caching classes proves to be either impossible or extremely difficult to implement in many of the slightly-more-than-trivial web sites. This is one of the places where the ZPS kicks in (in addition to better maintainability and overall performance). If you're doing well with userland caching classes, by all means, use them - it's a free world.
Zeev
P.S.: You wouldn't have to go as far as mod_gzip for HTTP compression. PHP has built-in support for that, that I added a few version ago. The ZPS, however, has nice integration between the content caching module and compression, so you don't have to pay the price tag for compression, which is significant CPU overhead.
-- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
