PHP performance (Opcode caching / function volatility) - php

BACKSTORY
I maintain a spectrum of (web-)applications that all use a large homegrown PHP library. Some of these applications are traditional desktop applications that are used by employees, but others (which are also more relevant to this question), are PHP websites for which performance is becoming a more important issue as the popularity continues to grow.
CURRENT PHP CACHING METHODS
To speed up one of our websites (it's a shop, think of it as thinkgeek.com), i employ memcached to cache certain segments of the website that don't require constantly being dynamicly build (such as the product listing for a certain category).
We also use a pretty much factory-default installation of APC as an OPCode cache.
Both of these methods bring significant improvements to the website's performance, but i'm very much looking to go further down the road of optimisation.
Function Volatility in PHP
Coming from a Database background myself, i'm very fond of how PostgreSQL for example, uses function volatility to get massive performance gains while maintaining reliable and accurate results.
My question is, is there any extension to PHP that allows the developer to mark certain functions (or class methods) as IMMUTABLE? (meaning the result of that function is always the same, when given the same input arguments). This caching extension could then cache the result of that function which should result in massive performance gains when using big libraries of code.
A simple example would be a method such as SomeClass::getWebsiteFooter(); which returns some HTML code that's always the same, unless the website has been altered (in which case the cache would be flushed).
Does something like this exist ? I haven't been able to find anything remotely similar on the market. Are there any other methods of performance improvement that might benefit my situation ?

I would say you have look at php application as a web application and implement several levels of caching.
IMMUTABLE methods - I don't think is good approach. Usage of caching on db level, application level (memcached) is good start.
Then I would suggest caching on view level Smarty caching and caching proxy like Squid or Varnish

Related

Scaling PHP applications

I have an existing php website, that is written in an old fashion way.
Every page has the same pattern
<?php
require_once("config.php");
//Some code
require_once("header.php");
?>
Some HTML and PHP code mixture
<?php
require_once("footer.php");
?>
Where all the db connection, session data, language files are initiated at the "config.php" file.
And every DB access is done with a mysql_query call,
No OOP what-so-ever, purely procedural programming.
How would you to optimize this code structure in order to improve performance and make this website robust enough to handle heavy traffic ?
How would you to optimize this code structure in order to improve performance and make this website robust enough to handle heavy traffic ?
The structure you've shown us has very little scope for for optimization. Making it object-oriented will make it slower than it currently is. Note that the code within the included files may benefit greatly from various changes.
There's only 3 lines of code here. So not a lot of scope for tuning. The _once constructs add a (tiny) overhead, as does use of require rather than include - but this is a very small amount compared to what's likely to be happening in the code you've not shown us.
Where all the db connection, session data, language files are initiated at the "config.php" file
There are again marginal savings by delaying access to external resources until they are needed (and surrendering access immediately when they are no longer required) - but this is not an OO vs procedural issue.
Why will OO be slower?
Here the routing of requests is implemented via the the webserver - webservers are really good at this and usually very, very efficient. The alternative approach of using a front controller gives some scope for applying templating in a more manageable way and for applying late patching of the content (although it's arguable if this is a good idea). But using a front-controller pattern is not a requirement for OO.
Potentially, when written as OO code, redundant memory allocations hang around for longer - hence the runtime tends to have a larger memory footprint.
Overriding and decorating adds additional abstraction and processing overhead to the invocation of data transformations.
every DB access is done with a mysql_query call
There's several parts to this point. Yes, the mysql_ extension is deprecated and you should be looking to migrate this as a priority (sorry, but I can't recommend any good forward/backward shims) however it is mostly faster than the mysqlnd engine - the latter has a definite performance advantage with large datasets / high volume due to reduced memory load.
You seem to be convinced that there's something inherently wrong with procedural programming with regard to performance and scale. Nothing could be further from the truth. G-Wan, Apache httpd, Varnish, ATS, the Linux kernel are all written in C - not C++.
If you want to improve performance and scalability, then you're currently looking in the wrong place. And the only way to make significant in-roads is to to profile your code under relevant load levels.
If you really don't want to change your structure (OOP and mysql_*..., and even with these in fact), you should implement a cache system, to avoid the generation of content everytime. If you have some data that doesn't change often (like blog post, news or member profile), you can create a cache of 5 minutes on it, to lighten the SQL use. Google might help you for this.
There's also a lot of web techniques to optimize pages loading: use a CDN to load your static ressources, Varnish cache...
With PHP itself, there's also some methods, but a lot of blog post exists about that, just look here for example :) For example:
Avoid regex if possible
Initialize variable if you need it: it's 10 times slower to increment/decrement an non-initialized variable (which is ugly btw)
Don't call functions in for declaration, make temp variable instead
etc.
Don't hesitate to benchmark, make some tests with JMeter to simulate a pool of connections and see which page is slow and what you should optimize first.

PHP OO vs Procedure with AJAX

I currently have a AJAX heavy(almost everything) intranet webapp for a business. It is highly modularized(components and modules ala Joomla), with plenty of folders and files. ~ 80-100 different viewing pages (each very unique in it's own sense) on last count and will likely to increase in the near future.
I based around the design around commands and screens, the client request a command and sends the required data and receives the data that is displayed via javascript on the screen.
That said, there are generally two types of files, a display files with html, javascript, and a little php for templating. And also a php backend file with a single switch statement with actions such as, save, update and delete and maybe other function. Several pages/screens may use the same php backend.
Recently, I have been adding an server sided undo function that requires me to reuse some code. So, I took the chance to try out OOP but I notice that some functions are so simple, that creating a class, retrieving all the data then update all the related rows on the database seems like overkill for a simple action as speed is quite critical. Also I noticed there is only one class in an entire file.
So, what if the entire php is a class. So, between creating a class and methods, and using global variables and functions. Which is faster?
Writing object oriented PHP will not affect your performance at all. If you use extensions like Zend Optimizer, it can even work faster.
So, there's really no reason not to use the much cleaner and more easily maintainable object oriented paradigm in PHP.
Writing purely procedural code may even lead to a performance drop since optimizations can be much harder and small details that eat up execution time are more likely to occur in such a messy environment.
The question is misguided. The problem is not one of speed, it's one of code organization. Using only global functions and variables, and lots of them, it'll get harder and harder to avoid naming conflicts and keep everything organized. Classes help you package and abstract things. Execution speed is a secondary concern, and in most cases won't increase noticeably, if at all. Development speed though can increase significantly over time, since you'll have to deal less with conflicts.

Framework Comparison and Overhead

I am working on a Facebook game which is developed using Zend framework. Right now I don't have lots of traffic and already seen quite a large # of data usage / CPU time.
Actually, I'm not good at Zend. I good at coding from scratch for both PHP & JS.
so, I am curious about the performance of Zend framework. becuase I'm thinking about rebuilding the applciation using Zend as the backend to manage the data / session / logic. and use JS (native code or JQuery) for the front-end rendering UI and handle user action in the client side.
In between, use aJax to get data from Zend backend.. most likely REST.
Anyone has suggestion about this kind of structure? I want to cut down the server load by that and also easier to manage code, plus better user experience.
Appreciate if anyone has good idea. :)
(POST few days later)
so, baseline PHP should be faster and use less data transfer (if code correctly) then Zend (or any) framework, right? Code reusablility is not a big concern here. :)
One thing many php developers fall victim of is sacrificing good architecture and sound principles for what they perceive as performance.
You may decide to cut corners in your code, but remember, "premature optimization is the root of all evil". So if you need to optimize early make sure that you're actually doing something useful.
The Zend libraries are engineered with best practice in mind, not necessarily performance. The rationale is that there are many ways to speed things up later without sacrificing code maintenance and readability (caching, load balancing, hardware, queue management, etc).
That been said, I don't think what you're looking for are statistics on ZF's performance, but rather advice on how to setup your application with it. Specifically, I'd advise you to create a dedicated, very light bootstrap for ajax requests. In ajax, you would normally only need some minimal prerequisites before dropping inside your controller. For the non ajax requests, set them up normally using the recommended architecture (bootstrap, front controller+plugins, controller+helpers, model+views+helpers).
My personal rule of thumb is that if I only am going to serve about 100 requests throughout the day, then there's very little reason to optimize anything. When the application starts feeling sluggish, if it generates enough revenue, maybe I can get a dedicated server, if not, there are always solutions such as apc, memcached, beanstalkd, etc.
Here's what you're looking for: PHP framework comparison benchmarks
Zend Framework vs raw PHP code tends to be close to a 1:500 requests per second ratio.
If you have a lot of time and not a lot of money, develop in raw PHP. If you have little time and enough money, develop in whatever is fastest without regard for performance...you can always add hardware later. If you fall in between the two, balance it as you see fit.
As much as I dislike it, CakePHP is faster to develop in than ZF, so it's great for time crunches. CodeIgniter is faster than either, but doesn't have as much built-in, so it's closer to the performance end of things without going to raw PHP.
There is only one thing to do first if you think that a ZF-based app is slow. Measure it. Various tools exist that will take the profiling output of Xdebug to show you which parts are slowing down the process, then you can make some moves towards optimising those parts (such as a lighter weight initialisation, and/or some caching). One good resource is the the Zend Framework book at survivethedeepend.com, "performance optimisation for ZF Apps".
In my opinion, benchmarks of frameworks are useless. They say something about an abstract situation, but performance is very situational. You should measure your application and optimise that. Yes, there's probably a limit to how far you can make your application go if you use lots of components from Zend Framework, but then there's also a limit for how fast your application can go before you need to drop PHP and write it in C. It's possible to make Zend Framework perform just fine on a high load site, but you have to put an effort in to it. Just like you have to if you don't use it.

Is object-oriented PHP slow?

I used to use procedural-style PHP. Later, I used to create some classes. Later, I learned Zend Framework and started to program in OOP style. Now my programs are based on my own framework (with elements of cms, but without any design in framework), which is built on the top of the Zend Framework.
Now it consists of lots classes. But the more I program, more I'm afraid. I'm afraid that my program will be slow because of them I'm afraid to add every another one class which can help me to develop but can slow the application.
All I know is that including lots of files slows application (using eAccelerator + gathering all the code in one file can speed up application 20 times!), but I have no idea if creating new classes and objects slows PHP by itself.
Does anyone have any information about it?
This bugs me. See...procedural code is not always spaghetti code, yet the OOP fanboys always presume that it is. I've written several procedural based web apps as well as an IRC services daemon in PHP. Amazingly, it seems to outperform most of the other ones that are out there and editing it is super easy. One of my friends who generally does OOP took a look at it and said "no code has the right to be this clean"
Conversely, I wrote my own PHP framework (out of boredom) and it was done in a purely OOP manner.
A good programmer can write great procedural code without the overhead classes bring. A bad programmer who uses OOP will always write crappy OOP code that slows things down.
There is no one right answer to which is better for PHP, but rather which is better for the exact scenario.
Here's good article discussing the issue. I also have seen some anecdotal bench-marks that will put OOP PHP overhead at 10-15%
Personally I think OOP is better choice since at the end it may perform better just because it probably was better designed and thought through. Procedural code tends to be messy and hard to maintain. So at the end - it has to be how critical is performance difference for your app vs. ability to maintain, extend and simply comprehend
The most important thing to remember is, design first, optimize later. A better design, which is more maintainable, is better than spaghetti code. Otherwise, you might as well write your web app in assembler. After you're done, you can profile (instead of guess), and optimize what seems slowest.
Yes, every include makes your program slower, but there is more to it than that.
If you decompose your program, over many files, there is a point where you're including/parsing/executing the least amount of code, vs the overhead of including all those files.
Furthermore, having lots of files with little code ain't so bad, because, as you said, using things like eAccelerator, or APC, is a trivial way to get a crap ton of performance back. At the same time you get, if you believe in them, all the wonderful benefits of having and Object Oriented code base.
Also, slow on a per request basis != not scalable.
Updated
As requested, PHP is still faster at straight up array manipulation than it is classes. I vaguely remember the doctrine ORM project, and someone comparing hydration of arrays versus objects, and the arrays came out faster. It's not an order of magnitude, it is noticable, however -- this is in french, but the code and results are completely understandable.. Just a note, that doctrine uses magic methods __get, and __set a lot, and these are also slower than an explicit variable access, part of doctrine's object hydration slowness could be attributed to that, so I would treat it as a worst case scenario. Lastly, even if you're using arrays, if you have to do a lot of moving around in memory, or tonnes of tests, such as isset, or functions like 'in_array' (it's order N), you'll screw the performance benefits. Also remember that objects are just arrays underneath, the interpreter just treats them as a special. I would, personally, favour better code than a small performance increase, you'll get more benefit from having smarter algorithms.
If your project contains many files and due to the nature of PHP's file access checking and restrictions, I'd recommend to turn on realpath_cache, bump up the configuration settings to reasonable numbers, and turn off open_basedir and safe_mode. Ensure to use PHP-FPM or SuExec to run the php process under a user id which is restricted to the document root to get back the security one usually gains from open_basedir and/or safe_mode.
Here are a few pointers why this is a performance gain:
https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=46965
http://nirlevy.blogspot.de/2009/01/slow-lstat-slow-php-slow-drupal.html
Also consider my comment on the answer from #Ólafur:
I found especially auto-loading to be the biggest slow down. PHP is extremely slow for directory lookup and file open access, the more PHP function you use during a custom auto-loader, the bigger the slow-down. You can help it a bit with turning off safe-mode (deprecated anyways) or even open-basedir (but I would not do that), but the biggest improvement comes from not using auto-loading and simply use "require_once" with complete fs pathes to require all dependencies per php file you use.
Using large frameworks for web apps that actually do not require so large number of classes for everything is probably the worst problem that many are not aware of. Strip it down at least not to include every bit of code, keep just what you need and throw the rest.
If you're using include_once() then you are causing an unnecessary slowdown, regardless of OOP design or not.
OOP will add an overhead to your code but I will bet that you will never notice it.
You may reconsider to rethink your classes structure and how do you implement them. If you said that OOP is slower you may have to redesign your classes and how do you implement them. A class is just a template of an object, any bad designed method affects all the objects of that class.
Use inheritance and polimorfism the most you can, this will effectively reduce the amount of behaviors and independent methods your classes need, but first off all you need to create a good inheritance map, abstracting your first or mother classes as much as you can.
It is not a problem about how many classes do you have, the problem is how many methods, properties or fields they have and how well are those methods structured. Inheritance reduces the amount of methods to design drammatically and the amount of code to be compiled too.
As several other people have pointed out, there is a mild overhead to OO PHP, but you can offset it by focusing your optimization effort on the core classes that your various other classes derive from. This is why C++ is becoming increasingly popular in the world of high-performance computing, traditionally the realm of C and Fortran.
Personally, I've never seen a PHP server that was CPU-constrained. Check your RAM use (you can optimize the core classes for this as well) and make sure you're not making unnecessary database calls, which are orders of magnitude more expensive than any extra CPU work you're doing.
If you design a huge OOP object hog, that does everything rather than doing functional decomposition to various classes, you will obviously fill up the memory with useless ballast code. Also, with a slow framework you will not make a simply hello World any fast. I noticed it is a kind trend (bad habit) that for one single facebook icon, people include a hole awesome font library and then next there is a search icon with fontello included. Each time they accomplish something unusual, they connect an entire framework. If you want to create a fast loading oop app use one framework only like zephir-phalcon or whatever you fancy and stick to it.
There are ways to limit the penalty from the include_once entries, and that's by having functions declared in the 'include_once' file that themselves have their code content in an 'include' statement. This will load your library of code, but only those functions actually being used will load code as it is needed. You take a second file system hit for the included code, but memory usages drop to practically nothing for the library itself, and only the code used by your program gets loaded. The hit from the second file system access can be mitigated by caching. When dealing with a large project of procedural based PHP, this provides low memory usage and fast processing. DO NOT do this with classes. This would be for a production instance, a development server will show all the penalty of hits since you don't want caching turned on.

PHP performance considerations?

I'm building a PHP site, but for now the only PHP I'm using is a half-dozen or so includes on certain pages. (I will probably use some database queries eventually.)
Are simple include() statements a concern for speed or scaling, as opposed to static HTML? What kinds of things tend to cause a site to bog down?
Certainly include() is slower than static pages. However, with modern systems you're not likely to see this as a bottleneck for a long time - if ever. The benefits of using includes to keep common parts of your site up to date outweigh the tiny performance hit, in my opinion (having different navigation on one page because you forgot to update it leads to a bad user experience, and thus bad feelings about your site/company/whatever).
Using caching will really not help either - caching code is going to be slower than just an include(). The only time caching will benefit you is if you're doing computationally-intensive calculations (very rare, on web pages), or grabbing data from a database.
Sounds like you are participating in a bit of premature optimization. If the application is not built, while performance concerns are good to be aware of, your primary concern should be getting the app written.
Includes are a fact of life. Don't worry about number, worry about keeping your code well organized (PEAR folder structure is a lovely thing, if you don't know what I'm talking about look at the structure of the Zend Framework class files).
Focus on getting the application written with a reasonable amount of abstraction. Group all of your DB calls into a class (or classes) so that you minimize code duplication (KISS principles and all) and when it comes time to refactor and optimize your queries they are centrally located. Also get started on some unit testing to prevent regression.
Once the application is up and running, don't ask us what is faster or better since it depends on each application what your bottleneck will be. It may turn out that even though you have lots of includes, your loops are eating up your time, or whatever. Use XDebug and profile your code once its up and running. Look for the segments of code that are eating up a disproportionate amount of time then refactor. If you focus too much now on the performance hit between include and include_once you'll end up chasing a ghost when those curl requests running in sync are eating your breakfast.
Though in the mean time, the best suggestions are look through the php.net manual and make sure if there's a built in function doing something you are trying to do, use it! PHP's C-based extensions will always be faster than any PHP code that you could write, and you'll be surprised how much of what you are trying to do is done already.
But again, I cannot stress this enough, premature optimization is BAD!!! Just get your application up off the ground with good levels of abstraction, profile it, then fix what actually is eating up your time rather than fixing what you think might eat up your time.
Strictly speaking, straight HTML will always serve faster than a server-side approach since the server doesn't have to do any interpretation of the code.
To answer the bigger question, there are a number of things that will cause your site to bog down; there's just no specific threshold for when your code is causing the problem vs. PHP. (keep in mind that many of Yahoo's sites are PHP-driven, so don't think that PHP can't scale).
One thing I've noticed is that the PHP-driven sites that are the slowest are the ones that include more than is necessary to display a specific page. OSCommerce (oscommerce.com) is one of the most popular PHP-driven shopping carts. It has a bad habit, however, of including all of their core functionality (just in case it's needed) on every single page. So even if you don't need to display an 'info box', the function is loaded.
On the other hand, there are many PHP frameworks out there (such as CakePHP, Symfony, and CodeIgniter) that take a 'load it as you need it' approach.
I would advise the following:
Don't include more functionality than you need for a specific page
Keep base functions separate (use an MVC approach when possible)
Use require_once instead of include if you think you'll have nested includes (e.g. page A includes file B which includes file C). This will avoid including the same file more than once. It will also stop the process if a file can't be found; thus helping your troubleshooting process ;)
Cache static pages as HTML if possible - to avoid having to reparse when things don't change
Nah includes are fine, nothing to worry about there.
You might want to think about tweaking your caching headers a bit at some point, but unless you're getting significant hits it should be no problem. Assuming this is all static data, you could even consider converting the whole site to static HTML (easiest way: write a script that grabs every page via the webserver and dumps it out in a matching dir structure)
Most web applications are limited by the speed of their database (or whatever their external storage is, but 9/10 times that'll be a database), the application code is rarely cause for concern, and it doesn't sound like you're doing anything you need to worry about yet.
Before you make any long-lasting decisions about how to structure the code for your site, I would recommend that you do some reading on the Model-View-Controller design pattern. While there are others this one appears to be gaining a great deal of ground in web development circles and certainly will be around for a while. You might want to take a look at some of the other design patterns suggested by Martin Fowler in his Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture before making any final decisions about what sort of design will best fit your needs.
Depending on the size and scope of your project, you may want to go with a ready-made framework for PHP like Zend Framework or PHP On Trax or you may decide to build your own solution.
Specifically regarding the rendering of HTML content I would strongly recommend that you use some form of templating in order to keep your business logic separate from your display logic. I've found that this one simple rule in my development has saved me hours of work when one or the other needed to be changed. I've used http://www.smarty.net/">Smarty and I know that most of the frameworks out there either have a template system of their own or provide a plug-in architecture that allows you to use your own preferred method. As you look at possible solutions, I would recommend that you look for one that is capable of creating cached versions.
Lastly, if you're concerned about speed on the back-end then I would highly recommend that you look at ways to minimize your calls your back-end data store (whether it be a database or just system files). Try to avoid loading and rendering too much content (say a large report stored in a table that contains hundreds of records) all at once. If possible look for ways to make the user interface load smaller bits of data at a time.
And if you're specifically concerned about the actual load time of your html content and its CSS, Javascript or other dependencies I would recommend that you review these suggestions from the guys at Yahoo!.
To add on what JayTee mentioned - loading functionality when you need it. If you're not using any of the frameworks that do this automatically, you might want to look into the __autoload() functionality that was introduced in PHP5 - basically, your own logic can be invoked when you instantiate a particular class if it's not already loaded. This gives you a chance to include() a file that defines that class on-demand.
The biggest thing you can do to speed up your application is to use an Opcode cache, like APC. There's an excellent list and description available on Wikipedia.
As far as simple includes are concerned, be careful not to include too many files on each request as the disk I/O can cause your application not to scale well. A few dozen includes should be fine, but it's generally a good idea to package your most commonly included files into a single script so you only have one include. The cost in memory of having a few classes here and there you don't need loaded will be better than the cost of disk I/O for including hundreds of smaller files.

Categories