Re: [Phpwebsite-developers] PEAR DB and auto_increment

[Don S. <do...@se...>]

I guess what you "think" doesn't count for much.  I would require valid 
numbers.  I'll assume you are using mysql with postnuke.  Have you tested 
with postgres or mssql or oracle or anything else?  It doesn't sound like 
it.

I personally would want real evidence of quasi-scientific testing.  Just 
setting up a page to directly call the mysql functions and then make those 
calls through PEAR is enough.  Perhaps the PEAR folks have done such 
things...

Don.

On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Eloi George wrote:

> www.actionfigure.com is actually a postnuke site, but is a pretty good
> representation of what we may hope that one of our (or our client's) sites
> can achieve.  Looking at his stats at
> http://www.action-figure.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Stats&file=index it
> looks like the site has averaged 570,000 hits per month for the last 9
> months.  That's 13 hits per second.
> 
> Postnuke doesn't have any load-balancing features, so all this is handled on
> one server.  If we don't count the main page (13 modules), the average page
> on the site looks like it uses 6 modules including banner rotations & user
> stats. If we assume just 1 query per module, then we end up with  an average
> of 78 queries per second!
> 
> Hmm.  I don't think any db's can handle that much...
> 
> -Eloi-
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Don Seiler" <do...@se...>
> To: "Eloi George" <el...@re...>
> Cc: <ma...@tu...>; <php...@li...>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 10:49 AM
> Subject: Re: [Phpwebsite-developers] PEAR DB and auto_increment
> 
> 
> > > I know I'm coming in too late in the game, but it'd be great if phpWS
> didn't
> > > try to support every db in the known world.  That way there wouldn't be
> a
> > > bunch of middle-layer generalized db access protocols to slow everything
> > > down.
> >
> > If we use the PEAR standards, then phpWS doesn't need to worry about
> > supporting things, the PEAR team will have done all that legwork, and I'm
> > confident that the PEAR team will have done it the most efficient way
> > possible.
> >
> > Even if phpWS only wanted to support two or three, once you support more
> > than one you might as well use PEAR and support them all, rather than
> > write the functions yourself.
> >
> > I'd be interested in seeing some benchmarks about how the pear DB layer
> > affects performance.  I don't think the hit would be that bad.  What is
> > the largest scale site running phpWS, btw?
> >
> > Don.
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net emial is sponsored by: Influence the future 
> of Java(TM) technology. Join the Java Community 
> Process(SM) (JCP(SM)) program now. 
> http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;4699841;7576301;v?http://www.sun.com/javavote
> _______________________________________________
> Phpwebsite-developers mailing list
> Php...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/phpwebsite-developers
>