On Aug 16, 2009, at 2:25 PM, Paul Biggar wrote:
I've seen that you talked about branch prediction misses in your
paper. Did you ever tried to compile the original PHP with different
compilers, for example from intel or sun studio? Did you test or have
you ever heard of someone who tested the
I have measured Quercus php performance compared to standard php with
APC on a ecommerce workload and found that Quercus php performed
slower than standard php + APC.
Regards,
Basant.
On Aug 16, 2009, at 11:16 AM, Tom Boutell wrote:
Re: the performance of PHP, if it's badly implemented, should
Hi Lothar,
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Lothar Scholz wrote:
> PB> Yes, by many times. Part of that might be the expense of PHP's weak
> PB> typing and references.
>
> No. Smalltalk, Javascript, Lua they all have the same problem with it
No, I disagree. Javascript, Lua and Smalltalk are much
Hi Tom,
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Tom Boutell wrote:
> Re: the performance of PHP, if it's badly implemented, shouldn't
> Quercus (a reimplementation of PHP in Java) run rings around it?
>
> In reality, Quercus is faster than PHP without APC, but with APC the
> Quercus team themselves admit
Re: the performance of PHP, if it's badly implemented, shouldn't
Quercus (a reimplementation of PHP in Java) run rings around it?
In reality, Quercus is faster than PHP without APC, but with APC the
Quercus team themselves admit it only "roughly matches" the original
PHP in speed.
http://www.cauc
Hello Paul,
PB> Yes, by many times. Part of that might be the expense of PHP's weak
PB> typing and references.
No. Smalltalk, Javascript, Lua they all have the same problem with it
and they solve it in much more clever and performant ways. Javascript
with its class free OO is even harder and with
