Видео

Lol, why?

@@hahabanero So that people would see that those frameworks make most things orders of magnitude slower. And don't get me started with ORMs and many-to-many relations...

Smaller frameworks has lower footprint, for the case, micro-frameworks are better considering OPCache On, between frameworks Symfony is faster and between micro-frameworks leaf & fatfree are in the same range however for micro-scale projects I prefer pure php

Check out ruclips.net/video/Dk8YHQZ6jfY/видео.html

For a new framework 1:00 make sure to add it in the repo and ask for PR, asyn base stuff is out of the scope for the library

The competition between frameworks is high and speed is one of the factors however it wins in this comparison

@@DeskNook Can you try a new test with Laravel Octane and Swoole, this can give a really best performance, and test with pure php of course, this is really better than OPCache...

@@Trance_Code it's not better, it's also ridden with problems and the apparent speedup is negligible as you get better results with PHP-FPM without sideffects that come with Swoole and Octane. Octane is one big, big problem and shouldn't be used by serious apps.

Laravel has its pros and cons and one of the cons is the performance

@@DeskNook That is why o decided to create my own framework using pure php and basic libraries.

Yes we all should do that. Use Laravel only as template model. Only then innovation and intelligence begins.

As with all benchmarks, the relative performance depends heavily on the functionality you use in your benchmark code. If you are selecting a framework to do a "hello world" application, the best framework is the "none" framework. It is startlingly fast. It loads only 1 file. But if you're benchmark includes the sort of functionality that Frameworks provide, like ORM usage, html templates, data manipulation, the results will be different. Also, why would you ever run a complex framework with opcache off? Any benchmark with opcache off is irrelevant. That said, frameworks trend to preliad the entire framework and make zero effort to lazyload only the parts of the framework and application that are actually used. Doing this would be very beneficial to performance.

And this will scale with biger apps. As creator of PHP said all freimworks suck and as PHP progress this will be more and more true to the point of switching from framework to custom php solutions as it will yield much more stability, security and performace

Thanks buddy, not sure about it actually its challenging to have fair benchmarks on PHP Async libs

Glad to hear that Planned for that video however it's not the next one, make sure to hit the bell button to get notified of upcoming videos

For the current() function it will validate the current position of the key too For MyIterator which is an implementation of the Iterator interface, validity gonna check by valid() method, the same thing for ArrayIterator

Its not faster than normal, thats not the point about Fibers. Check out 0:35

@@DeskNook I didn't really understand what is the purpose of using Fiber, I tested your code in both cases the case with normal loop and the case with Fiber, the execution time is the same 0.003s. Please can you explain to me even in a line what is the best to use fiber (Do you mean that it is available for making a multitasking framework) do you know a multitasking framework that uses fiber, instead of using pcntl fork, I want to execute the same code in parallel on several hundreds of data, each processing takes 3s to finish, I want everything to finish in 3 sec, not in 3s X 100 ? Thank u.

​@@daviddavid-zl6gw As a short answer to your questions, Fibers are good for non-blocking stuff. I highly recommend you watch the video again. That example in the video is just about how to use Fibers, neither async nor performance. In case, you may use pthreads via cli mode too.

Thats blocking so our files are created in order from a to z, actually the code works fine with file_put_content however it's not optimized for async

Check out 2:21 (Example: Iterator OOP)

In that diagram, yii2 has won the first place among the frameworks, and the 3rd place among microframeworks But thats updated, check out the link in the description

In the updated version of that chart, pure php is about 52 times faster than laravel 9.1 for a simple hello world github.com/myaghobi/PHP-Frameworks-Bench#results-2022522

@@DeskNook Oh Wooohhooo. 52 times? That serious.

@@gillesashley9314 Yes it is, however, this is just for a simple hello world so for a full project the speed rate should be different

@@DeskNook Well I still believe pure PHP would be faster than laravel in huge projects. There are lots of hooks constantly been called per every request, and that is the main weakness of frameworks. I think Rasmus Lerdorf explained something like that. Well, Laravel's performance can be super charged with Octane though, so it's still a great framework.

They made it via C just like the PHP so its fast

Thanks, I'm a bit slow for videos but always around

The Fiber is an easy way to have async in PHP

@@DeskNook keep it up, great way to explain, need more videos for php 8.2

@@issamjaafari5519 Thanks, sure

There is not use for fibers in usual projects, its for low level programming better for async purpose

i used to work in both node and php , for web development there is hardly any need of aysnc code , cause i found myself using aysnc await always for thing to work on node as its async by default , while php is sync by nature which is mostly u will be needing if working on web devlopment. But if there are some tasks where IO operation needs to be performed then i can see this beign usefull , as now i use to call python or c# to process the data , now i guess that will change. Hard to digest that it took them decades to put this in php ecosystem.

Hello why fiber is not activated for php-v8.1 in debian 11, how activate fibers the extension isn't loaded, thank u

@@daviddavid-zl6gw I'm using ubuntu 22 which is a debian based distribution with the latest update of php8.1 & php8.2. Fibers work fine with both, so for your issue, I suggest to try with a clean install of php

@@DeskNook Thanks for your reply, it's good, "fiber" it works very well, the problem is in my code I used an old script which uses fiber->create instead of fiber->strat() I want to ask you a question that can help me, which use is the most efficient in parallel execution time: to use fiber or pcntl_fork. Thank you.

@@daviddavid-zl6gw pcntl_fork is more efficient than Fiber, however I prefer to use fibers or pthreads

Thanks buddy. For Amp/ReachPHP the difference is in the scope, both are written by PHP and already updated with Fibers. Swoole is an extension, good in performance and features.

@@DeskNook yes, i've seen comparison between nodeJs and swool. In ReactPHP there were yeald hell some time ago, but in AmPhp there where sort of promises already. Who is faster and yeasy to implement, in your opinione?

I remember an old benchmark that ReactPHP got a higher speed factor than Amp, for now there shouldn't be much difference between these two. I prefer React, Amp more readable with Auryn & Coroutines. I would choose one if it wasn't a cool thing for me and go with another one, this is my strategy :) Have it in mind, you can use Amp as an event loop for React (means you can use both)