|
|
Posted by Jeff North on 01/22/07 12:50
On 22 Jan 2007 02:20:59 -0800, in comp.lang.php "ircmaxell"
<ircmaxell@gmail.com>
<1169461259.901956.297150@11g2000cwr.googlegroups.com> wrote:
>| On Dec 19 2006, 3:29 pm, Ivan Marsh <anno...@you.now> wrote:
>| > On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 11:59:29 -0800, juss...@gmail.com wrote:
>| > > Usually when in need to compare which is faster, I tend to think that in
>| > > the very end databases are just flat files. The only difference between
>| > > real flat files and database is the database software, which has been
>| > > built to optimize, among other things, the speed of quering of the data.
>| > > If you disregard all of the fundamentals of database design...
>| > > normalization, index optimization, etc.
>| >
>| > A flat file can be very fast as long as you're talking about a very small
>| > file. At the point the overhead of the database server matches the access
>| > time of the flat file based on its size the database server will always be
>| > faster... assuming your database isn't designed like a flat file (which it
>| > shouldn't be).
>|
>| Well, I wound up redesigning the program anyway, and what a speed
>| difference!!! I went to an almost completely database system (I still
>| write a bunch of files, but I don't read any of them). The page load
>| went from .93 seconds to .24 seconds... The file read portion went
>| from .36 seconds to (are you ready?) a measly .00023 seconds using the
>| database... WOW!!! You can say that is a little difference...
Just to add to this discussion...
What would be wrong, in this instance of a single variable under 1k,
being placed into a $_GLOBAL variable?
{Please no flames as I think that it is an interesting problem and
maybe a solution to a limited set of file/database problems).
---------------------------------------------------------------
jnorthau@yourpantsyahoo.com.au : Remove your pants to reply
---------------------------------------------------------------
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|