These kinds of numbers are great to see. I often hear people mention
how things cake is used for Mozilla plugins or that it can scale - but
really just about anything can scale if you through enough hardware at
it (there are upper limits but.. within reason).
One of the questions I have with cakephp is at what point in my
application will I have to move from shared to VPS to dedicated
hosting. If I have a framework that can slow those transition steps
then that's a bonus. I understand that it's not the only factor to
consider and the developer time is also an expensive consideration,
but for people doing low-capital projects doing their own design/
development, it's an important factor. (at least it seems so when
making the decision what to do.)
The more real numbers that people can give it will help disperse the
worries about real-world implementation.
Y.
On Jul 10, 3:36 pm, "
martin.westin...@..."
<
martin.westin...@...> wrote:
> I agree with James to a large extent.
> I have been pleasantly surprised at how well CakePHP applications
> scale and how easy it has been to fix bottlenecks when they have
> appeared. You can very easily make quick alterations and re-factor
> code when everything is structured well.
>
> Some anecdotal info:
> Of-course, it all depends on what each of us consider to be a big
> application. My "big" app right now does not break a sweat on a simple
> 1u rack-server (nothing fancy on its own but it has a redundant twin).
> Requests per day are only 10-20k but they result in 2-4k transactions
> saved to the database. The database grows by about 250MB per month
> with the longest table currently at just over 400k rows.
>
> For this kind of application, the problem-areas have been limiting
> recursions, moving data-processing from PHP into MySQL when possible
> and handling a few problems with parallel transactions. MySQL has been
> really great at dealing with a lot of data and the performance have
> only suffered when Cake has been asked to organise 100k rows of data
> info Model arrays and similar situations.
> ---end anecdote
>
> You should choose your framework more by how fast and well-built your
> app will be than performance. Extra servers are a lot cheaper than
> 6months extra development. :)
>
> On Jul 9, 2:27 pm, James K <
james.m.k...@...> wrote:
>
> > You can do anything in CakePHP that you can do writing from scratch in
> > PHP. You take a performance hit by introducing CakePHP's overhead into
> > the project right off the bat, but in turn, you'll end up being able
> > to develop your project more quickly and in a more structured and
> > maintainable fashion.
>
> > Performance and efficiency are things that can always be improved as
> > time goes on, so I generally don't let that stop me from starting
> > large scale projects with Cake. The trade-off is well worth it, IMO.
>
> > - James
>
> > On Jul 9, 12:00 am, loguKK <
logudot...@...> wrote:
>
> > > Hi,
>
> > > I have been started using CakePHP for small web sites.. Can I use it
> > > to develop such social networking portal
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CakePHP" group.
To post to this group, send email to
cake-php@...
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
cake-php+unsubscribe@...
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
