Posted by Michael Fesser on 07/31/07 11:47

..oO(Jerry Stuckle)

>Michael Fesser wrote:
>
>> 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?
>
>Because it's completely unnecessary. But you don't seem to understand
>that part.

I _do_ understand that, I just don't agree that it wastes as much
resources as you claim.

Additionally I don't care that much at all about some more or less CPU
cycles (you won't even notice a difference on a properly configured
machine) because there's a whole bunch of other things that can (and do)
waste a lot more.

>> 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.
>
>But there are other reasons for delivering images from databases.

There are also reasons for not doing that.

>There
>are no good reasons for parsing every file as PHP.

There are, I already gave some. One reason was to have proper URLs
without a .php suffix. Of course there are other ways to do that, but
passing all pages through PHP is one way to achieve that goal and is
quite easy to setup. This _is_ a reason.

>>> There are other reasons for
>>> delivering images from the database.
>>
>> This isn't part of the discussion.
>
>Oh, so now it's not part of the discussion?

No. The reasons why or why not delivering images from a DB is not part
of this discussion, and actually I don't really want to discuss that.
But the fact that it wastes resources _is_ part of the discussion.

>> Looking for <?php or <!--#foo in a string is pretty easy. Even the PHP
>> parser doesn't have much to do in plain HTML.
>
>You really need to understand parsers more before you make such claims.

I do.

> Searching for <?php or <!--$foo are not the only things parsers must do.

Sure, but that's where it all begins. No processing instruction, no
further parsing. Just pass-through.

Micha

[Back to original message]