On Jan 2, 2011, at 1:17 PM, Adam Richardson wrote: > > I tend to disagree with Ashley on this topic. For many websites, I'll start > out making all pages .php, even if they don't require PHP at the moment. > That's for a couple reasons. > > 1) A few years back, there was certainly a significant performance advantage > to keeping essentially static pages html. However, in my current > benchmarking (using both siege and ab on my Ubuntu servers using apache with > mod_php), if I use a cache such as APC and a well-configured apache server, > PHP tends to perform just as well (or sometimes even better) than the html > version. > > Rasmus has demonstrated similar performance results: > http://talks.php.net/show/froscon08/24 > > 2) I don't want to have to change urls site-wide and set up redirects from > the old url whenever a page requires adding dynamic capabilities. By making > all pages PHP right from the beginning, adding dynamic capabilities is a > snap as I just add the functionality. > > Adam
I agree starting with all .php files is good practice for basic sites. I recommend for applications and bigger then basic project using a decent framework or main routing file to handle routes for you, instead of requiring you to manually adjust them if something changes. Regards, -Josh ____________________________________ Joshua Kehn | josh.k...@gmail.com http://joshuakehn.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
