Thread: RE: [Phplib-users] phplib vs. pear
Brought to you by:
nhruby,
richardarcher
Menu
▾
▴
phplib-users
|
From: Daniel B. <bo...@io...> - 2002-05-07 19:12:46
|
anyone know what the cause of the slowdown is? is it all the included files, or just the way the db class is written? -----Original Message----- From: Saulius [mailto:sa...@ye...] Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 4:59 AM To: php...@li... Subject: Re: [Phplib-users] phplib vs. pear Hello, > classes had been included but before they were initialised. If you=20 > alter it to start timing before the classes are included then the output=20 > is not quite so unfavourable for PEAR. Yes. Exactly I altered tests and stated timing before any includes. And=20 I was suprised. For example, doing 1 query (after altering tests) took:=20 mysql: 0.03 sec, phplib: 0.06 sec, adodb: 0.14 sec, pear: 0.17 sec.=20 Diference among phplib and pear is enough big: 0.11 sec. So I think,=20 pear is too slow and very unefective. If it would be interesting I could put results in website. > See http://www.dybnet.de/MDB/benchmarks.pdf for some more test results. My test were taken from that site (http://phplens...). Bye, Saulius _______________________________________________________________ Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: ban...@so... _______________________________________________ Phplib-users mailing list Php...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/phplib-users |
|
From: steve g. <li...@gr...> - 2002-09-23 13:11:35
|
I've seen threads in the old list and this list that discuss pear vs. phplib, but I'm still not sure _why_ pear didn't want to take the phplib classes. I would like to generate a discussion within this list that includes differences in database, session/auth, templates, forms and other classes. It seems to me that in some cases, pear gives me _less_ functionality that pear; DB - pear DB is slow and doesn't appear to give me any more granularity. Session/ Auth - pear Auth uses php sessions rather than a database session polynomial and variables. I know that there is a strict set of coding standards for contributions to pear. Is there some set of practices inferred within these standards that will tend to give more flexibility if pear is used? -- steve grimes <li...@gr...> |
|
From: S. <bj...@ba...> - 2002-09-23 18:31:22
|
Hi, * steve grimes wrote: > Session/ Auth - pear Auth uses php sessions rather than a database > session polynomial and variables. Native PHP4 sessions can use DB as a storage container and PHPLIB's session class also can use native PHP4 sessions, so I don't see any big difference. > I know that there is a strict set of coding standards for contributions It's not that hard to learn if you want to contribute to PEAR. -- Wenn mit der Website das Herz Ihres Unternehmens aus dem Takt kommt. Wenn das kleine Problem vom Montag am Freitag vor dem RollOut ein grosses ist. * te...@th... Wir helfen Ihnen. Innerhalb von 2 Stunden. * 0931/78 43 804 |
|
From: Joe S. <jo...@be...> - 2002-09-23 18:48:09
|
Hello Bjoern, I've tried to find information on the HTML_Template_PHPLIB package without not much success. Is the documentation just missing from pear.php.net or am I missing something else. How are changes and bugfixes from phplib tracked? thanks, Joe On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 08:31:15PM +0200, Bj?rn Schotte wrote: > Hi, > > * steve grimes wrote: > > Session/ Auth - pear Auth uses php sessions rather than a database > > session polynomial and variables. > > Native PHP4 sessions can use DB as a storage container and > PHPLIB's session class also can use native PHP4 sessions, so > I don't see any big difference. > > > I know that there is a strict set of coding standards for contributions > > It's not that hard to learn if you want to contribute to > PEAR. > > -- |
|
From: S. <bj...@ba...> - 2002-09-23 18:51:56
|
Hi Joe, * Joe Stewart wrote: > I've tried to find information on the HTML_Template_PHPLIB package without > not much success. Is the documentation just missing from pear.php.net or am I > missing something else. Documentation is in the PHPLIB Documentation. > How are changes and bugfixes from phplib tracked? Not at all, since I don't have much time ATM. But feel free to grab a cvs account if you need something to be fixed. -- Wenn mit der Website das Herz Ihres Unternehmens aus dem Takt kommt. Wenn das kleine Problem vom Montag am Freitag vor dem RollOut ein grosses ist. * te...@th... Wir helfen Ihnen. Innerhalb von 2 Stunden. * 0931/78 43 804 |
|
From: Joe S. <jo...@be...> - 2002-09-23 19:05:09
|
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 08:51:50PM +0200, Bj?rn Schotte wrote: > > Documentation is in the PHPLIB Documentation. > How does one know that the package exists in PEAR if not from the PEAR website and documentation? I understand not duplicating the actual interface documentation, but is it referenced anywhere by PEAR? I'm sure there are many that didn't know you had taken the time to port template.inc to PEAR. > > How are changes and bugfixes from phplib tracked? > > Not at all, since I don't have much time ATM. But feel free > to grab a cvs account if you need something to be fixed. > thanks for getting it in PEAR. Joe |
|
From: S. <bj...@ba...> - 2002-09-23 19:07:19
|
Hi Joe, > How does one know that the package exists in PEAR if not from the PEAR > website and documentation? Currently the class is only in CVS. To appear on the PEAR web site I have to release a packages (including package.xml, docs etc.), but I didn't have the time yet ... > interface documentation, but is it referenced anywhere by PEAR? Only if you look at cvs.php.net > I'm sure there are many that didn't know you had taken the time to port > template.inc to PEAR. Yep. Hopefully I will have some time in the next weeks to release it as a package - then it will appear on the PEAR web site. Greetings, Björn. -- Wenn mit der Website das Herz Ihres Unternehmens aus dem Takt kommt. Wenn das kleine Problem vom Montag am Freitag vor dem RollOut ein grosses ist. * te...@th... Wir helfen Ihnen. Innerhalb von 2 Stunden. * 0931/78 43 804 |
|
From: Michael C. <mdc...@mi...> - 2002-09-23 16:30:24
|
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 09:02:13AM -0400, steve grimes wrote: > I've seen threads in the old list and this list that discuss pear vs. > phplib, but I'm still not sure _why_ pear didn't want to take the phplib > classes. I would like to generate a discussion within this list that > includes differences in database, session/auth, templates, forms and > other classes. > > It seems to me that in some cases, pear gives me _less_ functionality > that pear; > > DB - pear DB is slow and doesn't appear to give me any more granularity. > > Session/ Auth - pear Auth uses php sessions rather than a database > session polynomial and variables. > > I know that there is a strict set of coding standards for contributions > to pear. Is there some set of practices inferred within these standards > that will tend to give more flexibility if pear is used? I gave Pear a look before I wrote phpauth. I personally think that it's a huge amount of overhead for what it does, plus a lot of learning about their way of programming. The bottom line is that in its current state, PHP doesn't have what it takes to make a CPAN-like system. The PHP philosophy is too different. Pear is a poor stand-in for that. The bottom line is that PHPLIB seemed like the right mix, doesn't require any funky programming, and has always worked for me (regardless of the quirks). The only part I didn't like was the auth class, so I rewrote it. Moving to Pear would involve too much pain. Michael -- Michael Darrin Chaney mdc...@mi... http://www.michaelchaney.com/ |
|
From: S. <bj...@ba...> - 2002-09-23 18:29:26
|
Hi, * Michael Chaney wrote: > a huge amount of overhead for what it does, plus a lot of learning about > their way of programming. Coding guidelines are not that hard to learn. > The bottom line is that in its current state, PHP doesn't have what it > takes to make a CPAN-like system. PEAR does not want to be CPAN-like. > Pear is a poor stand-in for that. Since PEAR does not want to be CPAN-like, it can't be a poor stand-in. -- Wenn mit der Website das Herz Ihres Unternehmens aus dem Takt kommt. Wenn das kleine Problem vom Montag am Freitag vor dem RollOut ein grosses ist. * te...@th... Wir helfen Ihnen. Innerhalb von 2 Stunden. * 0931/78 43 804 |
|
From: Giancarlo <gia...@na...> - 2002-09-23 18:34:45
|
Il 20:29, luned=EC 23 settembre 2002, hai scritto: > Hi, > > * Michael Chaney wrote: > > a huge amount of overhead for what it does, plus a lot of learning ab= out > > their way of programming. There's so much code in PEAR, that a compiler preprocessor would really b= oost=20 its performance better than having all settings, initializations, include= s=20 etc be done by the interpreter. Gian |
|
From: Peter B. <re...@f2...> - 2002-05-08 07:29:37
|
At 12:12 PM 5/7/02 -0700, Daniel Bondurant wrote: >anyone know what the cause of the slowdown is? >is it all the included files, or just the way the db class is written? I believe it is partly to do with the amount of code being included, but mainly because (and this is hearsay) the way they are written - the classes are well separated with good inheritance. Unfortunately PHP is slower than usual when you do this, hence the results :-( I'm hoping that PHP5 will fix these problems so we can write better OO code - as I'm slowly learning the best way to do it for Java I want to do the same in PHP without the overhead - although seriously OO appears to be overkill for many little tasks that PHP is used for. Of course that doesn't mean that the language shouldn't support them as for larger projects (or for proper classes as opposed to function libraries wrapped in a class) they are brilliant. Peter. ---oOo--- sendcard - The free PHP e-card solution http://www.sendcard.org |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X