[Brook]

What do you think?

Drupal?
Silverstripe?
symfony?
CAKE?
Zend?
ROR or Python even?

To power websites like flickr (profiles, friends lists, groups, forums, uploads, comments etc), but with an added 'editorial' side for news, articles etc. With lots of logged in users serving millions of pages per month.

Interested in what you guys think!

[hello-world]

where is joomla ?

[Brook]

Originally Posted by hello-world

where is joomla ?

I've never seen a large (or very large) site use it - from what I hear it is a slug.

[Krik]

I started learning php some months ago.After reading you post I think I wasted my precious time. So ASP.net better than php ?

It definitely is not a waste of time.

I started on PHP years ago have picked up Javascript then LUA and have tampered with C and assembly. PHP is were I got my start and as it is 100% free to learn it (which beats most other languages that need to be compiled). And that will allow you to use it as a big stepping stone into many other languages.

dschreck's post is on the money. Having worked with linux it gives you some options you may not have with a windows server. And I am confident PHP can go head to head with ASP. After all that is what they designed it for.

But the point on how many of us will ever build a site that serves millions is a good one. I have done a site that came close to the 10K mark and that was an intense project not sure I would even want to be involved on anything much bigger (too many cooks in the kitchen).

Now to the issue of frameworks. I must admit I have never used one. Of course every name mentioned so far I have downloaded tried for various things and basically at the end of the day I always found I need something custom made and hated having to modify someone elses code. So I usually build every thing from scratch. Well if you don't count the copying and pasting from some other past project.

If you use a framework makes sure it has all you need or there is mod for it to get you what you need because if you have to change even the slightest thing it could take days just to track down were the exact lines of code are you need to change.

[ETbyrne]

I personally use my PHP framework, Dingo. I can't say I know how it would hold up to millions of users, but I would assume it would do just fine.

[Village Idiot]

If you are looking for the traffic of sites like flickr, free tools probably aren't the best option. PHP in and of itself isn't a great tool for really high traffic sites. If you insist on using PHP for something like that, get familiar with C and start writing components for your heavier functions.

Originally Posted by ETbyrne

I personally use my PHP framework, Dingo. I can't say I know how it would hold up to millions of users, but I would assume it would do just fine.

The fact that you do not know probably means it won't.

[hello-world]

Originally Posted by Village Idiot

If you are looking for the traffic of sites like flickr, free tools probably aren't the best option. PHP in and of itself isn't a great tool for really high traffic sites.



The fact that you do not know probably means it won't.

Then what is that great tool ?

By the way why can't I see the rest of your post ???

[Village Idiot]

A "great" tool would be something that is not a scripting language. PHP is a slow messy scripting language that is hacked together by amateurs. High traffic sites need the fastest processes possible, the most noticeable way to do this is to run pre-compiled programs because they are already in machine code. C or C++ are great (if not the best when programmed well) tools for really high traffic sites, but ASP.NET is also a very capable tool that is easier to learn.

What you have quoted was my entire post at the time you quoted it (I edited it soon after posting)

[hello-world]

Originally Posted by Village Idiot

A "great" tool would be something that is not a scripting language. PHP is a slow messy scripting language that is hacked together by amateurs. High traffic sites need the fastest processes possible, the most noticeable way to do this is to run pre-compiled programs because they are already in machine code. C or C++ are great (if not the best when programmed well) tools for really high traffic sites, but ASP.NET is also a very capable tool that is easier to learn.

What you have quoted was my entire post at the time you quoted it (I edited it soon after posting)

I started learning php some months ago.After reading you post I think I wasted my precious time. So ASP.net better than php ?

[Tanax]

Originally Posted by hello-world

I started learning php some months ago.After reading you post I think I wasted my precious time. So ASP.net better than php ?

You didn't waste your time.
PHP is a great language, and is used by many applications.

Not alot of sites has 1million hits per day, and none of the sites that anyone here on this forum will produce won't have half that.

But as an example, take vBulletin forum application. There are people who own forums using vBulletin that has over 10 million users. Sure they're not logged on at the same time, but they would probably recieve at least 100.000 logins per day, not to mention all the guests viewing the site.

It depends alot on the webhotel/server you're using.
Sure maybe C allocates memory better or more efficient, but PHP is definitely NOT a waste of time to learn.

Another reference is the many wordpress blogs that you see out there.

[dschreck]

Originally Posted by Tanax

You didn't waste your time.
Not alot of sites has 1million hits per day, and none of the sites that anyone here on this forum will produce won't have half that.

Zynga.com - top right corner: 8million daily active users. So, you're incorrect.

[Tanax]

Originally Posted by dschreck

Zynga.com - top right corner: 8million daily active users. So, you're incorrect.

So it says. I can create a website that says 60million daily active users.

Also, if you read what I wrote, I said: none of the sites that anyone here PRODUCE, not: none of the sites that anyone here HELPED PRODUCE. Did you code that whole site by yourself?!
Don't think so. More likely is that you work there along with others. But I'm just assuming, I can't really know.

However that text that you got is just a text, it isn't really saying anything to me, except that you can write HTML code which is.. good for you .

Regarding the topic, I've been into codeigniter a bit. Maybe not the best from any of you more knowledgable programmers. I found it however, to fit my needs quite well.
I would've picked Zend, but that just didn't work for me

[xenon]

...and there was optimized programming...

You actually CAN write PHP code that runs smoothly on very high-end websites: from 100.000 to 10.000.000. Why would you need more? I myself worked on such big project well planned (dating portal - 500.000 users) and it all went extremely well.

[Village Idiot]

dschreck, it seems that you have me corrected.

Originally Posted by hello-world

I started learning php some months ago.After reading you post I think I wasted my precious time. So ASP.net better than php ?

It would be nothing short of ignorant for me to say that PHP is a waste of your time, or that ASP.net is flat out better. I do like .net a lot more, but PHP is a great language.

[dschreck]

Wheever I'm working on a large community site I look for the following:

1. Does it have the ability to draw a DB from a pool?
2. Does it have the ability to use Memcache?
3. Will the code scale?

If you're looking to use something out of the box, you may have the wrong idea. No matter what framework you want to go with, you're going to need certain tools.

PHP sites are capable of handling millions of users a day. It's an extremely fast scripting language. You just have to use it correctly.

So, if you're looking for a great framework to get started with, find the one you like. After that, prepare to mod it out.

As for me, i prefer home grown frameworks.

[Village Idiot]

Originally Posted by dschreck

PHP sites are capable of handling millions of users a day. It's an extremely fast scripting language. You just have to use it correctly.

If by correctly, you mean making the intensive functions in C and adding them on, I would agree. But PHP is in and of itself slow because it is a interpreted scripting language. Even when cached, it is less efficient than hand written compiled code. The reason for this is that PHP code commands the PHP engine, not the machine.

[dschreck]

Originally Posted by Village Idiot

If by correctly, you mean making the intensive functions in C and adding them on, I would agree. But PHP is in and of itself slow because it is a interpreted scripting language. Even when cached, it is less efficient than hand written compiled code. The reason for this is that PHP code commands the PHP engine, not the machine.

No, I mean straight out PHP.

I've worked with PHP to serve millions of users a day. If by "slow" you mean in comparison C, then you're wrong again. If you're going for straight out speed, then just write it in ASM.

The reason for this is because the linux kernal will cache the data being served. You even have the ability to save the compiled PHP - so you don't need to continously recompile your scripts.

If you believe PHP is a "slow" language, maybe you're in the wrong business. PHP is extremely fast and flexible.

Now, don't get me wrong. In order to serve MILLIONS of users a day, you need several web servers, a couple memcache servers, and a few database servers.

You'll usually set up your Master / Slave DB's, and use them correctly (balancing the selects, using a bucket list)

Then you'll need a couple memcache servers, where you handle which users use which memecache server. (Aka: hashing)

Your web servers will need to all share the same code base, and have a load balancer pool them.

You can impliment things like caching, but I'm able to serve hundreds of thousands of requests without any caching (Daily).

[Brook]

Dailymotion
Yahoo! Answers
Delicious

Are all using symfony as their framework - so I don't see why php is not a viable platform tbh..

[ETbyrne]

The fact that you do not know probably means it won't.

I simply say I don't know because I've never tested it on a website with millions of visitors. I'm pretty sure it would do just fine, I just don't know, 100%, that it will. Likewise you wouldn't know if one of your apps worked on a site with millions of visitors until you tried it. I'm just using the word 'know' in the correct context.

[Village Idiot]

Originally Posted by ETbyrne

I simply say I don't know because I've never tested it on a website with millions of visitors. I'm pretty sure it would do just fine, I just don't know, 100%, that it will. Likewise you wouldn't know if one of your apps worked on a site with millions of visitors until you tried it. I'm just using the work 'know' in the correct context.

Most apps I write would not because they are not specifically designed to do so. Are you saying that your framework was designed to run on extremely high traffic servers?