I have searched for a few hours already but have found nothing on the subject.
I am developing a website that depends on a query to define the elements that must be loaded on the page. But to organize the data, I must repass the result of this query 4 times.
At first try, I started using mysql_data_seek so I could repass the query, but I started losing performance. Due to this, I tried exchanging the mysql_data_seek for putting the data in an array and running a foreach loop.
The performance didn't improve in any way I could measure, so I started wondering which is, in fact, the best option. Building a rather big data array ou executing multiple times the mysql_fetch_array.
My application is currently running with PHP 5.2.17, MySQL, and everything is in a localhost. Unfortunatly, I have a busy database, but never have had any problems with the number of connections to it.
Is there some preferable way to execute this task? Is there any other option besides mysql_data_seek or the big array data? Has anyone some information regarding benchmarking testes of these options?
Thank you very much for your time.
The answer to your problem may lie in indexing appropriate fields in your database, most databases also cache frequently served queries but they do tend to discard them once the table they go over is altered. (which makes sense)
So you could trust in your database to do what it does well: query for and retrieve data and help it by making sure there's little contention on the table and/or placing appropriate indexes. This in turn can however alter the performance of writes which may not be unimportant in your case, only you really can judge that. (indexes have to be calculated and kept).
The PHP extension you use will play a part as well, if speed is of the essence: 'upgrade' to mysqli or pdo and do a ->fetch_all(), since it will cut down on communication between php process and the database server. The only reason against this would be if the amount of data you query is so enormous that it halts or bogs down your php/webserver processes or even your whole server by forcing it into swap.
The table type you use can be of importance, certain types of queries seem to run faster on MYISAM as opposed to INNODB. If you want to retool a bit then you could store this data (or a copy of it) in mysql's HEAP engine, so just in memory. You'd need to be careful to synchronize it with a disktable on writes though if you want to keep altered data for sure. (just in case of a server failure or shutdown)
Alternatively you could cache your data in something like memcache or by using apc_store, which should be very fast since it's in php process memory. The big caveat here is that APC generally has less memory available for storage though.(default being 32MB) Memcache's big adavantage is that while still fast, it's distributed, so if you have multiple servers running they could share this data.
You could try a nosql database, preferably one that's just a key-store, not even a document store, such as redis.
And finally you could hardcode your values in your php script, make sure to still use something like eaccelerator or APC and verify wether you really need to use them 4 times or wether you can't just cache the output of whatever it is you actually create with it.
So I'm sorry I can't give you a ready-made answer but performance questions, when applicable, usually require a multi-pronged approach. :-|
Related
I'm currently saving my language files in a MySQL database.
Is it generally better (I'm thinking about performance) to fetch all page specific language strings at once (a lot fewer queries, but they are bigger and contains some unnecessary strings) or fetch at request (that gives a lot more requests, but instead, they are much smaller and won't fetch unnecessary strings).
EDIT: I'm using APC, and there's about 200-250 page specific strings, but it becomes maybe 100-150 if I fetch one request. I'm hosting MySQL on the same machine.
It depends entirely on your situation and your available resources. Fetching everything at once will probably be better if you're making single-threaded requests to a remote server, for example, but more small requests might be faster and less memory-intensive running on a local MySQL server (Tuncay said it results in poor performance, tough). It would probably be even faster if the page were rigged up to make the requests asynchronously so that you're not waiting for the last one before making another.
However, the only way to really know is to run some benchmarks in your environment.
My experience is that the mysql server can easily handle a big request. Several small ones instead result in very poor performance. In comparable situations I find one query is most always better in terms of performance. Get the whole data from database and let php sort out the rest.
However, just fetching the data from db in one query is even better. Are you sure you cant use an appropiate "where" clause ?
I don't really have any experience with caching at all, so this may seem like a stupid question, but how do you know when to cache your data? I wasn't even able to find one site that talked about this, but it may just be my searching skills or maybe too many variables to consider?
I will most likely be using APC. Does anyone have any examples of what would be the least amount of data you would need in order to cache it? For example, let's say you have an array with 100 items and you use a foreach loop on it and perform some simple array manipulation, should you cache the result? How about if it had a 1000 items, 10000 items, etc.?
Should you be caching the results of your database query? What kind of queries should you be caching? I assume a simple select and maybe a couple joins statement to a mysql db doesn't need caching, or does it? Assuming the mysql query cache is turned on, does that mean you don't need to cache in the application layer, or should you still do it?
If you instantiate an object, should you cache it? How to determine whether it should be cached or not? So a general guide on what to cache would be nice, examples would also be really helpful, thanks.
When you're looking at caching data that has been read from the database in APC/memcache/WinCache/redis/etc, you should be aware that it will not be updated when the database is updated unless you explicitly code to keep the database and cache in synch. Therefore, caching is most effective when the data from the database doesn't change often, but also requires a more complex and/or expensive query to retrieve that data from the database (otherwise, you may as well read it from the database when you need it)... so expensive join queries that return the same data records whenever they're run are prime candidates.
And always test to see if queries are faster read from the database than from cache. Correct database indexing can vastly improve database access times, especially as most databases maintain their own internal cache as well, so don't use APC or equivalent to cache data unless the database overheads justify it.
You also need to be aware of space usage in the cache. Most caches are a fixed size and you don't want to overfill them... so don't use them to store large volumes of data. Use the apc.php script available with APC to monitor cache usage (though make sure that it's not publicly accessible to anybody and everybody that accesses your site.... bad security).
When holding objects in cache, the object will be serialized() when it's stored, and unserialized() when it's retrieved, so there is an overhead. Objects with resource attributes will lose that resource; so don't store your database access objects.
It's sensible only to use cache to store information that is accessed by many/all users, rather than user-specific data. For user session information, stick with normal PHP sessions.
The simple answer is that you cache data when things get slow. Obviously for any medium to large sized application, you need to do much more planning than just a wait and see approach. But for the vast majority of websites out there, the question to ask yourself is "Are you happy with the load time". Of course if you are obsessive about load time, like myself, you are going to want to try to make it even faster regardless.
Next, you have to identify what specifically is the cause of the slowness. You assumed that your application code was the source but its worth examining if there are other external factors such as large page file size, excessive requests, no gzip, etc. Use a site like http://tools.pingdom.com/ or an extension like yslow as a start for that. (quick tip make sure keepalives and gzip are working).
Assuming the problem is the duration of execution of your application code, you are going to want to profile your code with something like xdebug (http://www.xdebug.org/) and view the output with kcachegrind or wincachegrind. That will let you know what parts of your code are taking long to run. From there you will make decisions on what to cache and how to cache it (or make improvements in the logic of your code).
There are so many possibilities for what the problem could be and the associated solutions, that it is not worth me guessing. So, once you identify the problem you may want to post a new question related to solving that specific problem. I will say that if not used properly, the mysql query cache can be counter productive. Also, I generally avoid the APC user cache in favor of memcached.
My question is fairly simple; I need to read out some templates (in PHP) and send them to the client.
For this kind of data, specifically text/html and text/javascript; is it more expensive to read them out a MySQL database or out of files?
Kind regards
Tom
inb4 security; I'm aware.
PS: I read other topics about similar questions but they either had to do with other kind of data, or haven't been answered.
Reading from a database is more expensive, no question.
Where do the flat files live? On the file system. In the best case, they've been recently accessed so the OS has cached the files in memory, and it's just a memory read to get them into your PHP program to send to the client. In the worst case, the OS has to copy the file from disc to memory before your program can use it.
Where does the data in a database live? On the file system. In the best case, they've been recently accessed so MySQL has that table in memory. However, your program can't get at that memory directly, it needs to first establish a connection with the server, send authentication data back and forth, send a query, MySQL has to parse and execute the query, then grab the row from memory and send it to your program. In the worst case, the OS has to copy from the database table's file on disk to memory before MySQL can get the row to send.
As you can see, the scenarios are almost exactly the same, except that using a database involves the additional overhead of connections and queries before getting the data out of memory or off disc.
There are many factors that would affect how expensive both are.
I'll assume that since they are templates, they probably won't be changing often. If so, flat-file may be a better option. Anything write-heavy should be done in a database.
Reading a flat-file should be faster than reading data from the database.
Having them in the database usually makes it easier for multiple people to edit.
You might consider using memcache to store the templates after reading them, since reading from memory is always faster than reading from a db or flat-file.
It really doesnt make enough difference to worry you. What sort of volume are you working with? Will you have over a million page views a day? If not I'd say pick whichever one is easiest for you to code with and maintain and dont worry about the expense of the alternatives until it becomes a problem.
Specifically, if your templates are currently in file form I would leave them there, and if they are currently in DB form I'd leave them there.
How would you temporarily store several thousands of key => value or key => array pairs within a single process. Lookups on key will be done continuously within the process, and the data is discarded when the process ends.
Should i use arrays? temporary MySQL tables? Or something in between?
It depends on how many several thousands mean and how big the array gets in the memory. If you can handle it in PHP, you should do it, because the usage of mysql creates a little overhead here.
But if you are on a shared host, or you have limited memory_limit in the php.ini and can't increase it you can use a temporary table in MySQL.
Also you can use some simple and fast key value storage like Memcached or Redis, they can also work in Memory only, and have a real fast lookup of keys (Redis promises Time Complexity of O(1))
Several thousand?! You mean it could take up several KILObytes?!
Are you sure this is going to be an issue? Before optimizing, write the code the simplest, straightforward way, and check later what really needs optimalization. Also, only having the benchmark and the full code will you be able to decide on the proper way of caching. Everything else is a waste of time and the root of all evil...
Memcached is a popular way of caching data.
If you're only running that one process and don't need to worry about concurrent access, I would do it inside php. If you have multiple processes I would use some established solution so you don't have to worry about the details.
It all depends on your application and your hardware. My bet, is to let databases do (especially MySQL) just Databases' work. I mean, not to much work than store and retrieve data. Other DBMS may be real efficient (Informix, for example) but sadly, MySQL is not.
Temporary tables may be more efficient than PHP arrays, but you increase the number of connections tu the DB.
Scalability is an issue too. Doing it in PHP is better in that way.
It is kind of difficult to give a straight answer if we don't get the complete picture.
It depens where you source data is.
If your data is in the database, you better keep it there and manipulate it there and just get the items you need. Use temp tables if necessarily
If you data is already in PHP you probably better keep in there. Although handling data in PHP is quite intensive
If the data lookup will be done with only few queries do it with mysql temporary table.
If there will be many data lookups its almost always best to store it in php side. (connection overhead)
Im on an optimization crusade for one of my sites, trying to cut down as many mysql queries as I can.
Im implementing partial caching, which writes .txt files for various modules of the site, and updates them on demand. I've came across one, that cannot remain static for all the users, so the .txt file thats written on the HD, will need to be altered on the fly via php.
Which is done via
flush();
ob_start();
include('file.txt');
$contents = ob_get_clean();
Then I modify the html in the $contents variable, and echo it out for different users.
Alternatively, I can leave it as it is, which runs a mysql query, which queries a small table that has category names (about 13 of them).
Which one is less expensive? Running a query every single time.... or doing it via the method I posted above, to inject html code on the fly, into a static .txt file?
Reading the file (save in very weird setups) will be minutely faster than querying the DB (no network interaction, &c), but the difference will hardly be measurable -- just try and see if you can measure it!
Optimize your queries first! Then use memcache or similar caching system, for data that is accessed frequently and then you can add file caching. We use all three combined and it runs very smooth. Small optimized queries aren't so bad. If your DB is in local server - network is not an issue. And don't forger to use MySQL query cache (i guess you do use MySQL).
Where is your the performance bottleneck?
If you don't know the bottleneck, you can't make any sensible assessment about optimisations.
Collect some metrics, and optimise accordingly.
Try both and choose the one that either is a clear winner or if not available, more maintainable. This depends on where the DB is, how much load it's getting, and whether you'll need to run more than one application instance (then they'd need to share this file on the network and it's not local anymore).
Here are the patterns that work for me when I'm refactoring PHP/MySQL site code.
The number of queries per page is absolutely critical - one complex query with joins is fastest as long as indexes are proper. A single page can almost always be generated with five or fewer queries in my experience, plus good use of classes and arrays of classes. Often one query for the session and one query for the app.
After indexes the biggest thing to work on is the caching configuration parameters.
Never have queries in loops.
Moving database queries to files has never been a useful strategy, especially since it often ends up screwing up your query integrity.
Alex and the others are right about testing. If your pages are noticeably slow, then they are slow for a reason (or reasons) - don't even start changing anything until you know what the reasons are and can measure the consequences of your changes. Refactoring by guessing is always a losing strategy espeically when (as in your case) you're adding complexity.