Mike wrote:
thaks for the reply. I conducted a simple/rough benchmark to which is
more
expensive.
...
On the win box, file system access was 11 times faster, while on the
freeBSD
box, file system access was 3 times faster. The include of the adodb
class
is not benchmarked, as part of this
I was reading somewhere (can't remember where) that connecting to a db is a
pretty costly transaction. DB queries aside, does anyone know of any
benchmarks that demonstrate file access vs. db connections?
Similarily, while DB queries offer alot of power, would it be cheaper
(faster) to drop
On Friday, June 21, 2002, at 11:19 AM, mike wrote:
I was reading somewhere (can't remember where) that connecting to a db
is a
pretty costly transaction. DB queries aside, does anyone know of any
benchmarks that demonstrate file access vs. db connections?
Similarily, while DB queries
Erik,
thaks for the reply. I conducted a simple/rough benchmark to which is more
expensive. I tested on a Intel PIII (450MHz 384MB ram) box running Win Xp,
Apache 1.3.26 and PHP 4.2.1, and mysql 3.23.49 and freeBSD of similar stats
(1000MHz, 1G ram). I used the adodb database abstraction
Mike wrote:
Erik,
thaks for the reply. I conducted a simple/rough benchmark to which is more
expensive. I tested on a Intel PIII (450MHz 384MB ram) box running Win Xp,
Apache 1.3.26 and PHP 4.2.1, and mysql 3.23.49 and freeBSD of similar stats
(1000MHz, 1G ram). I used the adodb
George,
George Whiffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
I'm not quite sure what you are trying to achieve, but if holding the
data in a file is realistically an option i.e. your data is static, then
why not consider holding your final output
6 matches
Mail list logo
