I am working on a Facebook game which is developed using Zend framework. Right now I don't have lots of traffic and already seen quite a large # of data usage / CPU time.
Actually, I'm not good at Zend. I good at coding from scratch for both PHP & JS.
so, I am curious about the performance of Zend framework. becuase I'm thinking about rebuilding the applciation using Zend as the backend to manage the data / session / logic. and use JS (native code or JQuery) for the front-end rendering UI and handle user action in the client side.
In between, use aJax to get data from Zend backend.. most likely REST.
Anyone has suggestion about this kind of structure? I want to cut down the server load by that and also easier to manage code, plus better user experience.
Appreciate if anyone has good idea. :)
(depending on how big the application is) I'd go for lightweight dispatcher and use of zend. Zend dispatch process is too complicated for simple things like facebook games and especialy for AJAX calls. That should lower your CPU usage. Data usage is not connected with using zend i guess...
Related
I'm building a new Laravel 8 application and given the reactivity features available with Livewire package, that essentially turn a backend developer into a full-stack developer (no advanced Javascript knowledge needed), I don't use any POST actions or request handling logic in my scripts. Every CRUD operation is handled with modal windows and AJAX requests. So my question is: Are there some drawbacks in this approach? Are there some limitation that will emerge in the future from the fact that my scripts don't directly handle HTTP request?
Thanks for your opinions.
FYI I'm not familiar with Laravel or Livewire. I'll use the term "platform" below as a general word to encapsulate technologies and libraries, etc, such as what you describe.
Platforms tend to focus on the high-value scenarios that most people need - so as long as what you need the platform to do aligns with what it can do, you're fine (e.g. simple CRUD). But, if you need to do something that pushes the boundaries of what the platform can do then you'll run into issues: it may not be possible; it's possible but really inefficient / a pig to work on; distorts your architecture and decision making.
Platforms like this are good in that they hide complexity, which is great until you need to access it and look under the hood. This applies to everything from debugging to developing features using approaches that the platform / platform designers haven't allowed for.
As a new developer, learning how to do things "the long way" (e.g. hand-code AJAX calls) is great as a learning experience. By doing that you can better appreciate how platforms like the ones you mention work - because you understand the underlying principles. So, a disadvantage is that new developers won't get that experience through working on this solution - they'll have to do that as a side project (which is not "evil", but it is a consideration).
I'm building out a transactional web app intended for mobile devices. It'll basically just allow players in a league to submit their match scores to our league admin. I've already built it out somewhat with angularjs/JSON Services/ionic but it's very slow going. Changing requirements and very little time to work on it have me considering starting over in CakePHP (despite being fairly new to it and MVC in general).
What coding practices can I follow to keep the user experience fast? My cakephp source folder is massive compared to my angular source folder but if I understand correctly, that won't necessarily affect the user because most of the heavy lifting will be done by the server and presented as a fairly small website to the client, correct?
Should I try to do a big data load right when they login so that most of the data is already client side? Are there ways I can make the requests to/from the server smaller? Any pointers would be great.
Thanks
Without knowing the specifics of your data model, it's hard to give specific ways to optimize.
I would take a look at sending data asynchronously (client-side) with Pusher (or something home-grown) or using pagination to break up large sets of results into smaller subsets.
You can use something like a Real User Metric (RUM) monitor at Pingometer to track performance for users. It'll show what, if anything, takes time to load - network stuff (connectivity, encryption, etc.), application code (controllers), DOM (JavaScript manipulation), or Page Rendering (images, CSS, etc.).
We are going to develop rest server for our application (and all logic is on client javascript).
So we thought to use Phalcon php, but we also need to create realtime chat system, which is much more easy to do using node.js. This made us think about using node.js instead of phalcon
Unfortunatly, we are not good expirienced in node.js, we love phalcon for its performance and internal beauty.
The quiestion is, did anybody compare phalcon and node.js performance? May be it's better to use node.js only for long polling chat requests, but i dont like when project is connected with so different tools.
You are trying to compare two different things IMO.
node.js has a lot of power and flexibility but so does Phalcon. If you want to create a chat application with Phalcon, then you will need to implement some sort of polling mechanism in your browser that would refresh the chat window every X seconds. Getting/Inserting the data from the database will be Phalcon's job. Javascript will be used to do the polling i.e. refresh the chat page every X seconds.
The problem with this approach is that you might be hitting your web server every X seconds from every client that has the chat application open - and thus refreshing the chat contents, even when there are no messages. This can become very intensive very quickly.
node.js has the ability to send messages to the subscribed clients instantly. Web sockets can do the same thing I believe.
Check this video out, which will give you an idea of how this can be achieved easily:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lW1vsKMUaKg
The idea is to use technologies that will not burden your hardware, rather collaborate with it. Having a "subscription" notification system (such as sockets or node.js) reduces the load on your application since only the subscribed clients receive the new messages and no full refresh is needed from the chat clients.
Phalcon is great for the back end with its speed and it can be used to construct the message which in turn will be passed to the transport layer and sent to the client. Depending on how you want to implement this, there are plenty of options around and you can easily mix and match technologies :)
as #Nikolaos Dimopoulos said, you're trying to compare two different things.
But here is my advice, while you're experienced with PhalconPHP framework, and you want to benefit from Phalcon speed and performance, you can implement the web app in Phalcon FW, and the chatting system in Node.JS as a service.
If your web application "The Phalcon app" needs to push messages from the backend, you can use http://elephant.io/ library for that, I have done this before with Yii framework and Node, and it's working perfectly.
My advice is to use what you already know, experimenting with nodejs just for the chat application.
Mainly because you said you do not have experience with it, so, because the chat app is something a lot of people made you'll find plenty of examples.
By doing so you will learn a lot from node and might even think about migrating from Phalcon if it suits your needs, using the features offered by expressjs for example.
I would not choose one over the other based on performance.
All,
I'm currently revamping an ancient IVR written using Classic ASP with VXML 2.0. Believe me, it was a mess, largely due to the mixing of routing logic between the ASP code and the VXML logic, featuring multiple postbacks a la ASP.NET. Not fun to debug.
So we're starting fresh with MVC 3 and Razor and so far so good. I've succeeded in moving pretty much all the processing logic to the controller and just letting most of the VXML be just voicing a prompt and waiting for a DTMF reply.
But, looking at a lot of sample VXML code, it's beginning to look like it might actually be simpler to do basic routing using multiple on a page and VXML's built-in DTMF processing and . More complex decision-making and database/server access would call the controller as it does now.
I'm torn between the desire to be strict about where the logic is, versus what might actually be simpler code. My VXML chops are not terribly advanced (I know enough to be dangerous), so I'm soliciting input. Have others used multiple forms on a page? Better or worse?
Thanks
Jim Stanley
Blackboard Connect Inc.
Choosing to use simple VoiceXML and moving the logic server side is a fairly common practice. Pros/Cons below.
Server-side logic
Often difficult to get retry counters to perform the way you want if you are also performing input validation (valid for grammar, but not for host or other validation logic)
Better programming language/toolkits for making logical descriptions (I'm not a fan of JavaScript, but even if you like JavaScript, you tend to have to create a lot of forms to get the flow control you want).
Usually easier to debug. Step through logical decisions and access to logging tools.
Usually easier to create reusable components that use parameters to alter component behavior.
Client side logic
Usually more scalable. VoiceXML browsers tend to use a large amount of their resources compiling and processing pages. One larger page will typically do better than a variety of smaller pages. However, platforms vary significantly and your size may make this negligible.
Better chance of using static pages. Many platforms have highly optimized caches (more than just fetched data). Like above may only matter if you have 100s of ports per device or 1000s of ports hitting a server.
Mixing and matching isn't bad until somebody requests some sort of global behavior change. You may be making the change in multiple places. Debugging techniques will also vary so it may complicate your support paths (e.g. looking in browser logs versus server logs to see what happened on a call).
Our current framework currently uses a mix of server and client. All our logic is in the VoiceXML, and the server is used for state saving and generating recognition components. Unfortunately as all our logic is in the voicexml, it makes it harder to unit test.
Rather than creating a large voicexml page that subdialogs to each question and all the routing done on the clientside, postback to the server after each collection, then work out where to go now. Obviously this has it's pros/cons as Jim pointed out, but the hope is to abstract some of the IVR/callflow from the VoiceXML and reduce the dependency on skilling up developers in VoiceXML.
I'm looking at redeveloping using MVC3, creating different views based on base IVR functions, which can then be modified based on the hosting VoiceXML platform:
Recognition
Prompts
Transfer
CTI Get/Set
Disconnect
What I'm still working out is how to create reusable components within the MVC. Whether to create something we subdialog to and return back the result (similar to how we currently do it), or redirect to a generic controller, and then redirect to the "Completed" action once the controller is done.
Jim Rush provides a pretty good overview of the pros and cons of server side versus client side logic and is pretty consistent with my discussion on this topic in my blog post "Client-side versus Server-side Development of VoiceXML Applications". I believe the pros of putting the logic on the server far outweigh putting it on the client. The VoiceXML User Group is moving towards removing most of this logic from VoiceXML in version 3.0 and suggesting using a new standard called State Chart XML (SCXML) to handle control of the voice application. I have started an open source project to make it easier to develop VoiceXML applications using ASP.NET MVC 3.0 which can be found on CodePlex and is called VoiceModel. There is an example application in this project which will demonstrate a method for keeping the logic server side, which I believe greatly improves reuse of voice objects.
I've been reading through a couple of questions on here and various articles on MVC and can see how it can even be applied to GUI event intensive applications like a paint app.
Can anyone cite a situation where MVC might be a bad thing and its use ill-advised?
EDIT: I'm specifically talking about GUI applications here!
I tried MVC in my network kernel driver. The patch was rejected.
I think you're looking at it kind of backwards. The point is not to see where you can apply a pattern like MVC, the point is to learn the patterns and recognize when the problem you are trying to solve can naturally be solved by applying the pattern. So if your problem space can be naturally divided into model, view and controller then it is a good candidate for MVC. If you can't easily see which parts of your design fall into the three categories, it may not be the appropriate pattern.
MVC makes sense for web applications.
In web applications, you process some data (on SA: writing questions, adding comments, changing user info), you have state (logged in user), you don't have many different pages, but a lot of different content to fit into those pages. One Question page vs. a million questions.
For making CMS, for example, MVC is useless. You don't have any models, no controllers, just a pages of text with decorations and menus. The problem is no longer processing data - the problem now is serving that text content properly.
Tho, CMS Admin would build on top of MVC just fine, it's just user part that wouldn't.
For web services, you'd better use REST which, I believe, is a distinct paradigm.
WebDAV application wouldn't benefit greatly from MVC, either.
The caveat on Ruby for Web programming is that Rails is better suited for building Web applications. I’ve seen many projects attempt to create a WebDAV server or a content management system CMS with Rails and fail miserably. While you can do a CMS in Rails, there are much more efficient technologies for the task, such as Drupal and Django. In fact, I’d say if you’re looking at a Java Portal development effort, you should evaluate Drupal and Django for the task instead.
Anything where you want to drop in 3rd party components will make it tough to work in the MVC pattern. A good example of this is a CMS.
Each component you get will have their "own" controller objects and you won't be able to share "control" of model -> ui passing.
I don't necessarily know that MVC is ever really a bad idea for a GUI app. But there are alternatives that are arguably better (and also arguably worse depending on whose opinion you're asking). The most common is MVP. See here for an explanation: Everything You Wanted To Know About MVC and MVP But Were Afraid To Ask.
Although I suppose it might be a bad idea to use MVC if you're using a framework or otherwise interacting with software that wasn't designed with MVC in mind.
In other words, it's a lot like comparing programming languages. There's usually not many tasks that one can say that one is better than the other for. It usually boils down to programmer preference, availability of libraries, and the team's experience.
MVC shouldn't be used in applications where performance is critical. I don't know if this still applys with the increase of computing power but one example is a call center application. If you can save .5 seconds per call entering and updating information those savings add up over time. To get the last bit of performance out of your app you should use a desktop app instead of a web app and have it talk directly to the database.
When is it a bad thing? Where ever there is another code-structure that would better fit your project.
There's countless projects where MVC wouldn't "fit", but I don't see how a list of them would be of any benefit..
If MVC fits, use it, if not, use something else..
MVC and ORM are a joke....they are only appropriate when your app is not a database app, or when you want to keep the app database agnostic. If you're using an RDBMS that supports stored procedures, then that's the only way to go. Stored procs are the preferred approach for experienced application developers. MVC and ORM are only promoted by companies trying to sell products or services related to those technologies (e.g. Microsoft trying to sell VS). Stop wasting your time learning Java and C#, focus instead on what really matters, Javascript and SQL.