SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Results 1 to 18 of 18
  1. #1
    SitePoint Enthusiast lix0r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    PHP applications and rendertime

    I was just wondering, what qualifies as a good or a bad rendertime? Currently, my application shifts betwen 0.01 and 0.005 sec. Is this an ok rendertime?

  2. #2
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy kyberfabrikken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    Posts
    6,157
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It depends on a lot of factors. How about you download some open source applications and install on your server. You can then meassure them for comparison.

  3. #3
    SitePoint Zealot Serberus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Herts, UK
    Posts
    113
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think you probably know that 100th of a second to render your page is pretty good - providing it's not "hello world!"

    Most visitors would be perfectly happy with that, it'll take far longer to download the page from your server.

    Have you benchmarked your application to see how it scales? Do you need to? Do you know how much traffic your site receives?

  4. #4
    SitePoint Enthusiast lix0r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yeah, I kinda knew that 0.001 sec was a good time. Of course this is the rendertime of the less heavy operations. And yes, they do more than displaying "Hellow World!"

    I haven't benchmarked my application, because I'm not entirely sure how you do this. If you could tell me how I do this, or point me in the direction of som good tutorials, I would greatly appreciate it

  5. #5
    SitePoint Wizard silver trophy kyberfabrikken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    Posts
    6,157
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    xdebug is the tool to use.

  6. #6
    SitePoint Enthusiast lix0r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks a lot

  7. #7
    simple tester McGruff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    1,690
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

  8. #8
    SitePoint Guru dbevfat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    ljubljana, slovenia
    Posts
    684
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    JMeter. So far I've only played around a bit with this, but it looks seriously promising.

  9. #9
    SitePoint Zealot Serberus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Herts, UK
    Posts
    113
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by McGruff
    Another vote for apache bench here.

  10. #10
    SitePoint Zealot Serberus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Herts, UK
    Posts
    113
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dbevfat
    JMeter. So far I've only played around a bit with this, but it looks seriously promising.
    I've used this once before, set up was pretty complicated and heavy testing required a few workstations to run it simultaneously, ate my workstation for breakfast.

  11. #11
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Norway - Oslo
    Posts
    198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by lix0r
    I was just wondering, what qualifies as a good or a bad rendertime? Currently, my application shifts betwen 0.01 and 0.005 sec. Is this an ok rendertime?
    The fact that you are asking that question pretty much proves that its good enough. If it wasnt, you would know it.

    This is more of a usability/accessibility question tho, how long are users willing to wait. If you get indications your site is to slow it becomes a php case.

    So, i guess you have nothing to worry about

  12. #12
    SitePoint Wizard Ren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,060
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

  13. #13
    SitePoint Guru dbevfat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    ljubljana, slovenia
    Posts
    684
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Serberus
    I've used this once before, set up was pretty complicated and heavy testing required a few workstations to run it simultaneously, ate my workstation for breakfast.
    I've heard it's a very powerful toy, meant to be far more than just a stress-test tool, so it can certainly be an overkill.

  14. #14
    SitePoint Enthusiast lix0r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Findus
    The fact that you are asking that question pretty much proves that its good enough. If it wasnt, you would know it.
    I guess you're right, I'd probably get complaints if it were running to slow :P

  15. #15
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    208
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I installed Xdebug and was quite shocked to see an application doing 2000-2500 method calls per request. But looking at the log in KCacheGrind, everything looked pretty normal. A request to that app processes in about 0.3 seconds on my workstation. Another interface using the same model processes in 0.09 seconds, with around 750 method calls.

  16. #16
    SitePoint Zealot Serberus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Herts, UK
    Posts
    113
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Useful link for those of us with no Linux box running KDE available.

  17. #17
    SitePoint Wizard REMIYA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,351
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It's not the rendering time that matters for an application but the end result.

  18. #18
    SitePoint Wizard Mike Borozdin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Edinburgh, UK
    Posts
    1,743
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm using it too sometimes, it's quite good.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •