|
|
Posted by Michael Fesser on 07/31/07 10:34
..oO(Jerry Stuckle)
>Michael Fesser wrote:
>
>> Doesn't matter here. 20 requests are 20 requests, but it makes a big
>> difference if the server can deliver them statically as-is or if it has
>> to invoke a script handler for every single image.
>
>Not nearly as much as you claim.
Why are you then claiming that calling a script for every page wastes "a
hell of a lot" resources if it doesn't make much of a difference?
>>> The script will already be in
>>> memory (if nothing else, the OS cache will have it),
>>
>> Page-generating scripts can be cached as well, dependent on the
>> configuration of the webserver and the PHP interpreter.
>
>Sure they can. But they still have to be interpreted unnecessarily.
Like an image-from-db script. If it can be done with static files as
well, then calling the image script is unnecessary. Same thing.
>This isn't part of the discussion.
Of course it is. You were the one complaining about wasting resources
when parsing HTML for PHP, but you don't see (or actually don't want to
see) the wasted resources when delivering images from a DB.
>There are other reasons for
>delivering images from the database.
This isn't part of the discussion.
>> Depends on the server configuration I would say. SSI requires a parser/
>> interpreter as well. And PHP running as a server module is quite fast.
>> The work that has to be done by the parsers is quite the same - they
>> just look for special directives in the HTML code.
>
>You obviously don't understand how it works. The SSI parser is much
>smaller and much faster than the PHP parser.
Looking for <?php or <!--#foo in a string is pretty easy. Even the PHP
parser doesn't have much to do in plain HTML.
Micha
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|