It started as a "where does all that memory come from?" for a site<br>that is really bloated and caused Apache to eat 100MB per process,<br>then it evolved into: let us see how much memory old vs new Drupal<br>takes and for what?
<br><br>Eaton is write, that is the summary:<br><br>Bootstrap is a bit more, but modules are lighter.<br><br>Here is to hoping that contrib authors of large modules will bother <br>splitting their modules.<br><br>However, this is not the full story: there is still a lot of memory for
<br>arrays and such that happens when you sit on a lot of data, or when<br>you visit certain pages. This patch does not account for all that, and<br>measures only raw module memory usage upon loading.<br><br>So, Dries, do you want that memory measurement part in core?
<br>So devel can use it? This will help people who are porting modules<br>assess whether a split is warranted or not, and measure how much<br>a split helps too.<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 8/29/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">
Jeff Eaton</b> <<a href="mailto:jeff@viapositiva.net">jeff@viapositiva.net</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
My reading of the document is, "The basic bootstrap is a bit bulkier,<br>but modules are lighter." For pure core it's a bit of a wash, but I'm<br>betting that as more modules take advantage of the ability to split
<br>code between different .inc files (admin.inc, etc), we'll see contrib<br>getting lighter, too.<br><br>--Jeff<br><br><br>On Aug 28, 2007, at 3:58 PM, Dries Buytaert wrote:<br><br>> So what is the executive summary (
i.e. percentage reduction in<br>> Drupal 6 compared to Drupal 5)? ;)<br><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><a href="http://2bits.com">2bits.com</a><br><a href="http://2bits.com">http://2bits.com</a><br>
Drupal development, customization and consulting.