Hey,
Thanks for posting this info. It definitely sounds like we should
concentrate on the 0 length script at this point. I saw Dmitry
already made some good improvements.
It'd be helpful if others also run such an empty benchmark because it
seems like the two trees are on par now and that it
Andi Gutmans wrote:
Thanks for posting this info. It definitely sounds like we should
concentrate on the 0 length script at this point. I saw Dmitry already
made some good improvements.
Yup, that patch helped. And I guess on some architectures 5.1 is faster
now, but there is still a bit of a
l Message-
>> From: Rasmus Lerdorf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:34 AM
>> To: internals
>> Subject: [PHP-DEV] Calling performance geeks
>>
>>
>> We have a bit of a performance disconnect between 4.4 and 5.1
>> still.
MAIL PROTECTED]>; "'internals'"
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 12:12 PM
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] Calling performance geeks
Hi Rasmus,
I made two improvements in 5.1 and run the same bechmarks on Intel Pentium M
1.5GHz 2M cache.
top/top5/top10
php-5.1 740 550 430 req/s
To: Dmitry Stogov
>>Cc: 'Rasmus Lerdorf'; 'internals'
>>Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Calling performance geeks
>>
>>
>>I also see very little difference (in favor of php4) on my
>>test box (Dual Xeon 3.2GHz, running Linux 2.6.12 Fedora Core 3):
>>
>
Have you rebuilt 5.1 HEAD today?
Dmitry.
> -Original Message-
> From: Edin Kadribasic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 5:32 PM
> To: Dmitry Stogov
> Cc: 'Rasmus Lerdorf'; 'internals'
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Calling per
Message-
>>From: Rasmus Lerdorf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:34 AM
>>To: internals
>>Subject: [PHP-DEV] Calling performance geeks
>>
>>
>>We have a bit of a performance disconnect between 4.4 and 5.1
>>still. I
>>
nal Message-
> From: Rasmus Lerdorf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 7:34 AM
> To: internals
> Subject: [PHP-DEV] Calling performance geeks
>
>
> We have a bit of a performance disconnect between 4.4 and 5.1
> still. I
> was doing some bench
Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello Rasmus,
not a thing for 5.1 or 4.4 but in 5.2 we could change to a case
insensitive comparison function. That would allow us to change nearly
all of strcasecmp to memcmp. And in may cases it means one less
allocation. And it also means a lot of less code. The casins
Hello Rasmus,
not a thing for 5.1 or 4.4 but in 5.2 we could change to a case
insensitive comparison function. That would allow us to change nearly
all of strcasecmp to memcmp. And in may cases it means one less
allocation. And it also means a lot of less code. The casinsensitive
comparision is
With an empty.php file 0 bytes long I get:
PHP 5.1.3-dev (no opcode cache, variables_order=GP) 1168-1225 req/sec
over 5 runs of 1 requests each.
PHP 4.4 same config 1897-1951 req/sec
Just to make sure, since in this case an extra header would make a big
difference, the raw headers that
What are the results you're getting on an empty script? I'm just
curious whether it's execution speed or startup speed where you are
seeing the big hit. There were changes in both which might have
slowed things down. Another reason to be more careful re: bloat :)
Anid
At 08:34 PM 3/12/2006, R
We have a bit of a performance disconnect between 4.4 and 5.1 still. I
was doing some benchmarking today just as a sanity check on some APC
work I have been doing lately and came up with this:
http://lerdorf.com/php/bm.html
You can ignore the apc/eaccelerator stuff. Those numbers are not
13 matches
Mail list logo
