On 25 March 2010 23:23, Tommy Pham <tommyhp2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > There's the code example from that same link. You may have executed > the queries asynchronously, but the process of the results are still > serial. Let's face it, all of our processing of queries are not a > simple echo. We iterate/loop through the results and display them in > the desired format. Having execute the query and the processing of > the result in threads/parallel, you get the real performance boost > which I've been trying to convey the concept of serial versus > parallel. Actually, you haven't mentioned the processing as part of what the threads do until now. I see your point though: if you split that part off, you might gain some performance, that would otherwise be hard to get at. I wonder though, if the performance is worth it in the tradeoff for the maintenance nightmare it is when you split out content processing between 10 different threads. I wouldn't personally touch it unless I had no other option, but that's just my opinion. Anyway, I don't think either of us will change point of view much at this point - so we should probably just give the mailing list a rest by now. Thanks for the posts, it's been interesting to read :) > -- > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- <hype> WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fake51 BeWelcome: Fake51 Couchsurfing: Fake51 </hype> -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
