| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:34 |
markstory |
but letting Cache handle view caching is something I would like to do in the future :) |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:34 |
markstory |
Model needs changes too. |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:34 |
markstory |
there is more to it than that I think. |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:24 |
hiromi |
mean core enhancement |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:23 |
hiromi |
and ... i have a idea. if cache type is not file, using eval(Cache::read()) instead of include in the cache() function will work fine ? |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:19 |
hiromi |
index.php , cacheing myself |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:19 |
hiromi |
i guess there is only a way |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:18 |
markstory |
yeah, its kind of a pain how the current view caching works. |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:17 |
hiromi |
markstory: oh ... :( |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:17 |
hiromi |
with reading source , there is view cache usgin own file cache |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:17 |
markstory |
you can't put full page caches into memcache :( |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:16 |
hiromi |
is there way to cache action with memcache? |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:16 |
markstory |
sweet |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:14 |
dakota |
lol |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:14 |
dakota |
and simple php gets 2668 |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:14 |
dakota |
1.2.6 gets 5259.45 requests per second |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:14 |
dakota |
1.3 gets 5959.7 requests per second |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:14 |
dakota |
hehe, I conclude that cakephp is faster then a standard php file with echo 'hello world'; in |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:13 |
dakota |
yup |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:13 |
markstory |
saves many afterfind workarounds. |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:13 |
markstory |
yeah they are quite handy :) |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:11 |
dakota |
got to say, virtualFields are my favourite new feature :) |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:10 |
dakota |
and from my tests |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:10 |
markstory |
(faster from my tests) |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:10 |
markstory |
true, and with 1.3 running faster and having more features that 1.2 I think its an improvement. |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:08 |
dakota |
hardware is cheap, devs aren't |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:08 |
dakota |
the strength in CakePHP for me is not so much in the performance but in the rapid development time |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:07 |
dakota |
ye, saw that |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:07 |
markstory |
The zend guys showed that with their reply to the symfony benchmarks. |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:07 |
dakota |
and if your not careful it is easy to do the same thing by accident |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:07 |
dakota |
yup |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:07 |
markstory |
and find exactly what you were looking for. |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:07 |
markstory |
its relatively easy to make one sided benchmarks. |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:06 |
markstory |
I know :) |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:05 |
dakota |
it is so easy to setup a benchmark that looks neutral but in fact favours one particular test subject |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:05 |
markstory |
depending on what you are doing it can be made to go much faster as well. |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:04 |
markstory |
Last time I did benchmarks, (more than month ago) 1.3 was faster. |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:03 |
markstory |
I know |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:03 |
dakota |
well, just did the exact same test but with apache 2.2 and CakePHP 1.3 gives me better results |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:03 |
markstory |
I'm not replying to it though. |
| # |
Mar 5th 2010, 23:03 |
dakota |
markstory: Ok :) |