FUDforum
Fast Uncompromising Discussions. FUDforum will get your users talking.

Home » Imported messages » comp.lang.php » Re: Windows binaries 64bit for PHP
Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator
Return to the default flat view Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: Windows binaries 64bit for PHP [message #178064 is a reply to message #178063] Fri, 11 May 2012 19:29 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Jerry Stuckle is currently offline  Jerry Stuckle
Messages: 2598
Registered: September 2010
Karma:
Senior Member
On 5/11/2012 3:11 PM, Michael Fesser wrote:
> .oO(Jerry Stuckle)
>
>> On 5/11/2012 5:58 AM, Michael Fesser wrote:
>>> .oO(Jerry Stuckle)
>>>
>>>> And a system which creates all the images once so it doesn't have to
>>>> keep needlessly checking to see if an image exists or not is more
>>>> efficient than one which constantly has to see if something exists or not.
>>>>
>>>> Resizing is done ONCE.
>>>
>>> Right.
>>>
>>>> Checking has to be done on EVERY REQUEST.
>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>>
>>> Micha
>>>
>>
>> You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you? But you'll
>> argue it anyway.
>
> You still miss the point (or just don't want to accept it, as usual). If
> there's a static image file, there is absolutely no additional checking
> for existance necessary (besides the one that has to be done for every
> resource the server wishes to deliver, but this doesn't matter here).
>
> If the file is there, it will be delivered as-is, if not, it triggers a
> 404 (which could then create the requested resource on demand). That's
> the same for every static HTML or CSS file, so your claim from above
> "Checking has to be done on EVERY REQUEST" is simply wrong.
>
>> After all - you think there's no overhead in 404 processing!
>
> A little maybe, but I don't think it really matters. What much has the
> server to do after it didn't find the requested resource? Deliver
> another page or call a script. I can't think of much more, except maybe
> a second log entry. The typical redirects from http://example.com/foo to
> http://example.com/foo/, which are still seen on many sites, are much
> more expensive.
>
> Micha
>

No, you don't get it. A 404 causes even more overhead - Apache has to
detect the 404, determine which is the correct error page to load, and
load it. In this case it's a PHP file, so the PHP module has to be
loaded and the environment initialized, etc.

Then the PHP code needs to determine if it is even a request for an
image, and if the image can be found and resized. If so, the code must
resize the image and send it. Then the module cleanup has to be performed.

Plus, depending on what the sysadmin has installed for Apache
extensions, other modules may be called in the process.

That's a lot of overhead, especially when you know the images and the
sizes you need ahead of time.

It's fine if you're running 200 hits/day, but not in a busy server.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex(at)attglobal(dot)net
==================
[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: is_dir true from cli, false from Apache
Next Topic: in_array performance in unsorted vs sorted array
Goto Forum:
  

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ]

Current Time: Wed Oct 02 04:14:25 GMT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.07996 seconds