Mod_perl vs mod_php

[Jimi Thompson <jt...@link.com>]

Does anyone have any mod_perl vs. mod_php benchmarks?

Jimi

Re: Mod_perl vs mod_php

[Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org>]

On Tue, 12 Dec 2000, Perrin Harkins wrote:

> Please read the archives of this list before asking for Perl/PHP
> comparisons.  It has been discussed ad nauseum.  There are many good
> search interfaces for the list archives that will direct you to the
> previous posts.

To mention a few http://perl.apache.org/#general-list :)

_____________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman              JAm_pH     --   Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/       mod_perl Guide  http://perl.apache.org/guide 
mailto:stas@stason.org   http://apachetoday.com http://logilune.com/
http://singlesheaven.com http://perl.apache.org http://perlmonth.com/  

Re: Mod_perl vs mod_php

[Perrin Harkins <pe...@primenet.com>]

Please read the archives of this list before asking for Perl/PHP
comparisons.  It has been discussed ad nauseum.  There are many good
search interfaces for the list archives that will direct you to the
previous posts.

- Perrin

development time: Mod_perl vs mod_php

[Jie Gao <J....@isu.usyd.edu.au>]

On Tue, 12 Dec 2000 newsreader@mediaone.net wrote:

> What I really like to see compared is the development time of php vs perl code for a given
> problem.  I've read ad nauseam about perl development time being shorter than C.
> How does php compare to perl in this regard, I wonder.

I don't know about that but the fact that php is hard to debug is
really off-putting to a mod_perl programmer. Guess which takes
more time.


Jie

Re: Mod_perl vs mod_php

[ne...@mediaone.net]

On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 02:53:30PM -0800, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> >>>>> "newsreader" == newsreader  <ne...@mediaone.net> writes:
> 
> newsreader> Maybe he meant php hello world vs perl hello world?
> 
> And the point of such a comparison would be... what?

it will be to publish in your favorite magazine/web site/mailing list/whatever
Did you miss chamas' hello world thread?  I don't really care for 
benchmark myself but your point they way I understand was that it
was not possible to make benchmark comparison.  In fact in theory 
it is possible even beyond hello world.  Take two programmers
from perl and php worlds and give them the same problem.  It *is* possible
to make a comparison of the resultant applications.  Purely technical
comparison.

> The real costs of a web application these days are the total product

Now you are talking about something other than technical comparison.
Wouldn't that be like saying "ferrari has a bigger top speed than 
corolla does but so what corolla gets better gas mileage."  It all
depends on how benchmark is to be used.

transactions-per-second is an important factor that determines
whether or not somebody will come back to your site, I think.  So
if you are shooting for yahoo like numbers maybe you should start
thinking transaction-per-second. you are the one who frequently
touts the virtue of writing a real handler instead of using registry??
what is your point about such energetic touting?

What I really like to see compared is the development time of php vs perl code for a given
problem.  I've read ad nauseam about perl development time being shorter than C.
How does php compare to perl in this regard, I wonder.

> costs, not the transactions-per-second costs.  Until you're getting
> Yahoo-number hits, does it really matter whether something takes 1
> second vs 3 seconds to process?  And even then, shouldn't you be more
> worried about which of these two systems better supports 304 responses
> and data caching and dependency tracking, instead of which one
> executes a useless static page faster?
> 
> -- 
> Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
> <me...@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
> Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
> See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

Re: Mod_perl vs mod_php

["Randal L. Schwartz" <me...@stonehenge.com>]

>>>>> "newsreader" == newsreader  <ne...@mediaone.net> writes:

newsreader> Maybe he meant php hello world vs perl hello world?

And the point of such a comparison would be... what?

The real costs of a web application these days are the total product
costs, not the transactions-per-second costs.  Until you're getting
Yahoo-number hits, does it really matter whether something takes 1
second vs 3 seconds to process?  And even then, shouldn't you be more
worried about which of these two systems better supports 304 responses
and data caching and dependency tracking, instead of which one
executes a useless static page faster?

-- 
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<me...@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

Re: Mod_perl vs mod_php

[ne...@mediaone.net]

Maybe he meant php hello world vs perl hello world?


On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 01:16:59PM -0800, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> >>>>> "Jimi" == Jimi Thompson <jt...@link.com> writes:
> 
> Jimi> Does anyone have any mod_perl vs. mod_php benchmarks?
> 
> Perl code gets 0 performance on PHP.
> PHP code likewise gets 0 performance on Perl.
> 
> Given that, you've got to write different code on both, and you can
> probably always come up with enough variance that you can make
> benchmarks show whatever you want them to show.
> 
> Given *that*, what's your real question?
> 
> -- 
> Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
> <me...@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
> Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
> See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

Re: Mod_perl vs mod_php

["Randal L. Schwartz" <me...@stonehenge.com>]

>>>>> "Jimi" == Jimi Thompson <jt...@link.com> writes:

Jimi> Does anyone have any mod_perl vs. mod_php benchmarks?

Perl code gets 0 performance on PHP.
PHP code likewise gets 0 performance on Perl.

Given that, you've got to write different code on both, and you can
probably always come up with enough variance that you can make
benchmarks show whatever you want them to show.

Given *that*, what's your real question?

-- 
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<me...@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

Re: Mod_perl vs mod_php

[Jim Winstead <ji...@trainedmonkey.com>]

On Dec 13, Roger Espel Llima wrote:
> So, does anyone know what PHP does?  Does it parse the mixture of
> PHP and HTML every time?  Does it keep a cache?  Does it limit the
> size of this cache (which Apache::Registry doesn't)?.  How big does
> a typical Apache/PHP process get?

both php3 and php4 reparse every file, out of the box.

php3 parses and executes simultaneously, php4 is more like perl
and has a two-step compile-and-execute.

the php4 runtime is designed to allow plugins to do caching of
compiled scripts. bwcache (http://bwcache.bware.it/) is one such
plugin, and zend cache (http://www.zend.com/zend/products.php#cache)
is another that is supposed to be released soon.

i don't know about a 'typical' apache/php process, but the httpd
processes on www.php.net run at around seven megs (vsz -- rss
is around 3-5 megs). but that's a totally meaningless number, of
course, since it doesn't take into account any shared pages across
those processes.

(for what its worth, www.php.net runs on a dual p3/650 with 512M
of ram and does about four million page views and 300 gigs of
raw traffic a month. i would consider that an atypical setup --
most users of php are the people who host at the scads of shared
hosting companies that offer php support.)

for comparisons of php and mod_perl, i would focus on the things
you can do in mod_perl that you simply can't in perl (handlers for
phases other than content-handling, for example). mod_perl gives
you a lot more rope to do cool things and to hang yourself with.
(the former is why most of us are here, the latter is why there
aren't scads of shared hosting companies that offer mod_perl.)

jim

Re: Mod_perl vs mod_php

[Roger Espel Llima <es...@iagora.net>]

"Jimi Thompson" <jt...@link.com> wrote:
> Does anyone have any mod_perl vs. mod_php benchmarks?

Speaking of PHP, does anyone here know how mod_php handles the
memory bloat / precompilation problem?

Preloading scripts is obviously a good thing (eg with the PerlStart
directive), we all know this on this list.  And even if you don't do
preloading, things like Apache::Registry keep your compiled scripts
in memory so the code doesn't have to get parsed again on each
request.

So, does anyone know what PHP does?  Does it parse the mixture of
PHP and HTML every time?  Does it keep a cache?  Does it limit the
size of this cache (which Apache::Registry doesn't)?.  How big does
a typical Apache/PHP process get?

I think these are all questions that we mod_perlers should be at
least familiar with... if only to respond to questions of PHPers, or
to improve mod_perl with any good ideas that mod_php may have.

-- 
Roger Espel Llima, espel@iagora.net
http://www.iagora.com/~espel/index.html

Re: Mod_perl vs mod_php

[sp...@vancouver.yi.org]

> Does anyone have any mod_perl vs. mod_php benchmarks?

Given the fact you are the good programmer either would be about the same.
If you can't program your way out of a paper bag, benchmarks won't help
you. Benchmarks are for managers, are you the one?
pavel