On Jan 14, 2008 8:48 PM, Andrés Robinet <agrobinet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The only problem I had with nuSOAP was a name clash with the PHP 5 native > extension. But they fixed it in November (there was a previous > non-official > fix also.. but can't remember the link right now). > nuSOAP has been around for several years and it's working for PHP 4 or PHP > 5. So far it's doing the job pretty well (what's more, for a SOAP API, > chances are that nuSOAP is included along with the code samples). Though I > didn't run any benchmarks, its speed is more than enough for my taste, > when > caching the WSDL object (in fact, most of the time will be spent in the > server to server roundtrip). > So... my vote for nuSOAP. i understand what youre saying, that the network i/o will typically constitute the most time in a SOAP request. i would imagine however that the php5 extension is much faster at building the request and parsing the response since nuSOAP is written entirely in php. i had to use it once and found the lack of documentation appalling. although, to be fair, id also say for anything beyond simple requests the documentation on the php site for the SOAPClient and related classes, could be more descriptive. i would label this thread as a case-in-point. -nathan
