[FX.php List] FMP PHP or FX.php...??

[Gjermund Gusland Thorsen]

What do you mean by OO?

2008/2/1, Leo R. Lundgren <leo at finalresort.org>:
>  Chris,
>
> Any chance of FX.php becoming OO anytime soon? Would be nice.
>
> // Leo
>
>
> 31 jan 2008 kl. 19.03 skrev Chris Hansen:
>
> Greetings List!
>
> This inquiry intrigued me.  During the beta days of the The FileMaker API
> for PHP (F.A.P.), FX.php seemed a bit faster; and since I have a little test
> box in my basement with both FX.php and F.A.P. installed on it, and F.A.P is
> no longer beta, I thought I'd throw equivalent tests at it, and see what
> popped out.  The results REALLY surprised me:
>
>     * F.A.P.: 14.6196269989
>     * FX.php: 1.72123408318
>     * F.A.P.: 14.7427921295
>     * FX.php: 1.68022203445
>     * F.A.P.: 15.8884699345
>     * FX.php: 2.96020698547
>     * F.A.P.: 14.6040740013
>     * FX.php: 1.64016890526
>     * F.A.P.: 15.450097084
>     * FX.php: 1.72534799576
>
> Average F.A.P. Time: 15.0610120296
> Average FX.php Time: 1.94543600082
>
> In short, FX.php is almost 8x faster!  I performed this test by simulating
> load using repeated queries via each API repeatedly.  Also, although the
> server in question is running the latest version of FileMaker Server
> Advanced 9, it only has a developer license installed, so I had to keep
> repetitions very low, but I would expect results to scale similarly as
> server load and available connections were increased.  Also, the test box is
> a Mac Mini, so you could handle a lot more lot with faster hardware.  I've
> attached my test code.
>
> --Chris Hansen
>   FileMaker 8 Certified Developer
>   FileMaker 7 Certified Developer
>   Creator of FX.php
>   "The best way from FileMaker to the Web."
>   www.iViking.org
>
> On Jan 31, 2008, at 6:27 AM, Leo R. Lundgren wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I cannot shed very much light upon whether FM PHP API is more integrated to
> the server than FX.php, but I doubt it. AFAIK, both of them communicated
> with the server using XML and parses it on their side. The PHP stuff you see
> on the server and in its permissions are most likely just administrative
> stuff FM put in there to integrate the PHP part with the server as a whole a
> bit more.
>
> I decided to go with the FM API, mainly because it's object oriented whereas
> FX.php uses arrays. I just like to keep it clean and similar to the rest of
> my code. I have no doubt that FX.php works just as well though.
>
> BTW, it would be interesting to see some performance comparisons between the
> two? Nomatter which one you choose, having FM as a DB backend will never be
> fast, but perhaps there's some difference in speed between the two anyway?
> Perhaps they parse XML differently or something.
>
> // Leo
>
> 31 jan 2008 kl. 14.20 skrev Steve Winter:
>
>
> Greetings all…
>
>
>
> In search of the holy grail, web app speed, I'm looking for;
>
> a.       gut feelings
>
> b.      opinions
>
> c.       evidence
>
> and am interested in all three on which is faster, the native FMP PHP
> interface or using FX.php…?
>
>
>
> I was under the impression that 'native' FMP PHP is simply an alternative to
> FX.php in that it still uses the xml interface… that said I've also noticed
> that in FMS 9 there is actually a PHP interface listed, which makes me
> wonder if in fact it has hooks directly into the server….??
>
>
>
> As I said, any information greatly received…
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> <speed_comparison.php>
> _______________________________________________
> FX.php_List mailing list
> FX.php_List at mail.iviking.org
> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list
>
>
> -|
>
> _______________________________________________
> FX.php_List mailing list
> FX.php_List at mail.iviking.org
> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list
>
>