Forget all what I've said in previous message.
There was an error not shown and the mvc complete dispatch was broke so the
result are faster.
Accept my apologize to Component writer's.
Bruno Friedmann wrote:
> Follow at the end
>
> Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
>> -- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL P
Benjamin Eberlei wrote:
> hello,
>
> you might want to install pecl-xdebug extension to PHP and enable profiling.
> You can then use Webgrind or KCachegrind to show you which functions and
> classes use the most processing power in your appliaction.
>
> Have you installed APC or eAccelerator?
Y
hello,
you might want to install pecl-xdebug extension to PHP and enable profiling.
You can then use Webgrind or KCachegrind to show you which functions and
classes use the most processing power in your appliaction.
Have you installed APC or eAccelerator?
On Thursday 23 October 2008 22:04:40 Br
Follow at the end
Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
> -- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> (on Tuesday, 21 October 2008, 09:45 PM +0200):
>> Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
>>> -- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>>> (on Tuesday, 21 October 2008, 06:56 AM +0200):
Matthew Weier
-- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
(on Tuesday, 21 October 2008, 09:45 PM +0200):
> Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
> > -- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > (on Tuesday, 21 October 2008, 06:56 AM +0200):
> > > Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
> > > > -- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PR
Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
> -- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> (on Tuesday, 21 October 2008, 06:56 AM +0200):
>> Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
>>> -- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>>> (on Monday, 20 October 2008, 07:00 AM +0200):
Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
>>>
There is one eminent thing to remember...
Performance problems will only occur when no caching is used.
After the first load into cache, ALL adapters have the same performance
!!!
The only difference is the first loading time.
Thanks about That Thomas, tmx work correctly only from 1.7 with cac
Thomas Weidner wrote:
>
> - Original Message - From: "Matthew Weier O'Phinney"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 3:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [fw-general] ZF performances / profiling the culprit
>
>
>> See if t
- Original Message -
From: "Matthew Weier O'Phinney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 3:00 PM
Subject: Re: [fw-general] ZF performances / profiling the culprit
See if the above changes help your performance. If not, the next thing
I
-- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
(on Tuesday, 21 October 2008, 06:56 AM +0200):
> Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
> > -- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > (on Monday, 20 October 2008, 07:00 AM +0200):
> > > Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
> > > > -- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PRO
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Yeah you have a huge bottleneck there by using the partial helper four
times. Try to replace the partial calls with simple "include '';" calls
and measure the time again.
Ben
...
: ___ _ ___ ___ ___ _ ___:
: |
Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
> -- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> (on Monday, 20 October 2008, 07:00 AM +0200):
>> Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
>>> -- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>>> (on Sunday, 19 October 2008, 07:30 PM +0200):
With the help of ZendStudio, I'm tr
-- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
(on Monday, 20 October 2008, 07:00 AM +0200):
> Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
> > -- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > (on Sunday, 19 October 2008, 07:30 PM +0200):
> >> With the help of ZendStudio, I'm trying to understand why on one
> >> a
Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
> -- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> (on Sunday, 19 October 2008, 07:30 PM +0200):
>> With the help of ZendStudio, I'm trying to understand why on one
>> application I've got 25/30 req/s and on the second one I've only a
>> 5/5.50 req (1.6.2) or a 7/8.2rqs
-- Bruno Friedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
(on Sunday, 19 October 2008, 07:30 PM +0200):
> With the help of ZendStudio, I'm trying to understand why on one
> application I've got 25/30 req/s and on the second one I've only a
> 5/5.50 req (1.6.2) or a 7/8.2rqs ( 1.7.0 notice the little change )
>
Bruno Friedmann wrote:
> Hi All.
>
> With the help of ZendStudio, I'm trying to understand why on one application
> I've got 25/30 req/s
> and on the second one I've only a 5/5.50 req (1.6.2) or a 7/8.2rqs ( 1.7.0
> notice the little change )
> ( a simple html file is giving a 385rqs and a 404 e
16 matches
Mail list logo