Go Premium for a chance to win a PS4. Enter to Win

x
  • Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 152
  • Last Modified:

What is faster ?

I've got a relative big script (60 kb)that has many sub's. Now I'm wandering if the script can be handled of quicker if I:
- make seperate files of the subs, with an 'require' sentence that points to the variables

- make seperate files of the subs, and each of them has got the same variables (as in the large script right now) in them.

- keep the large script.
0
saskia
Asked:
saskia
1 Solution
 
maneshrCommented:
personally i dont any of the approaches will speed up your script (even though it apprears to be a big one),
what you might want to do is optmize the sub routine themselves & make them more generalized.
0
 
jhurstCommented:
I largely agree with maneshr - optimizing the code is the main thing to do.

However, most web servers are not very good at finding and opening files, especially if they are on a network so you will tend to find that a script with less extra files will work faster.

I actually had a script on a SunOS server that needed to open about 30 files and do something with them.  I pre-saved the 30 files in one big one and the script typically ran in less than half the time.  

I then tried the same thing with perl modules and found the same problem.  If I need a module for just one small thing I copy the code into my main script.  Even though this is inellagant - it is faster.

Now, the real question is, "does this loss of ellegance pay off in terms of perceived performance improvement?"  - usually NO!
0
 
ercisCommented:
saskia, you can make your script run quicker, with porting it to quicker language, i.e. PHP or C. And try to optimize your code ...
0
How to Use the Help Bell

Need to boost the visibility of your question for solutions? Use the Experts Exchange Help Bell to confirm priority levels and contact subject-matter experts for question attention.  Check out this how-to article for more information.

 
jhurstCommented:
To some degree the script may run faster in C or something rather than perl - however, realistically it is a rare script that does enough for this to make a difference.  And, many servers are optimized for perl at this time while they are not for C.  Especially if you take into account that moost C programs end up being huge to load and most web-servers are intelligent enough to share the perl interpretter.

0
 
ercisCommented:
jhurst, most web-servers are able to run their OS binary executables, no matter in what lang they was written, before compiling !
0
 
jhurstCommented:
ercis, I agree.  And in fact this is really the problem with perl, that the code is sort of compiled when it is just about to be executed, and this does take some additional time.  In fact, for many this is the motivation for the perl->exe type products so that they can make executables ahead of time.

The problem with these perl->binary conversions is that like C, they make large files which tend to be slow to load.  However, there is no question that there may be times when the extra load time is warranted by the saving in the pre-compilation.

Having said all of this.  I doubt that it will be detactable.  Whereas, grabbing a large number of include and require modules can be detectable.
0
 
ercisCommented:
hmm imho, time to load one binary = time to run Perl interpreter, hence Perl needs +more time to interpret and execute script itself.
about size, usually binary execeutable file size is similar to corresponding C code (under Linux). so, "little" script (~15kB) can do big job ...
0
 
saskiaAuthor Commented:
Thanks for helping me out !!!
0

Featured Post

Free Tool: Path Explorer

An intuitive utility to help find the CSS path to UI elements on a webpage. These paths are used frequently in a variety of front-end development and QA automation tasks.

One of a set of tools we're offering as a way of saying thank you for being a part of the community.

Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now