[development] Drupal memory consumption (was: coding standard question)
kb at 2bits.com
Wed Aug 29 07:08:06 UTC 2007
It started as a "where does all that memory come from?" for a site
that is really bloated and caused Apache to eat 100MB per process,
then it evolved into: let us see how much memory old vs new Drupal
takes and for what?
Eaton is write, that is the summary:
Bootstrap is a bit more, but modules are lighter.
Here is to hoping that contrib authors of large modules will bother
splitting their modules.
However, this is not the full story: there is still a lot of memory for
arrays and such that happens when you sit on a lot of data, or when
you visit certain pages. This patch does not account for all that, and
measures only raw module memory usage upon loading.
So, Dries, do you want that memory measurement part in core?
So devel can use it? This will help people who are porting modules
assess whether a split is warranted or not, and measure how much
a split helps too.
On 8/29/07, Jeff Eaton <jeff at viapositiva.net> wrote:
> My reading of the document is, "The basic bootstrap is a bit bulkier,
> but modules are lighter." For pure core it's a bit of a wash, but I'm
> betting that as more modules take advantage of the ability to split
> code between different .inc files (admin.inc, etc), we'll see contrib
> getting lighter, too.
> On Aug 28, 2007, at 3:58 PM, Dries Buytaert wrote:
> > So what is the executive summary (i.e. percentage reduction in
> > Drupal 6 compared to Drupal 5)? ;)
Drupal development, customization and consulting.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the development