An inexperienced PHP question:
I've got a PHP script file that I need to include on different pages lots of times in lots of places.
I have the option of either breaking the included file down into several smaller files and include these on a as-needed basis... OR ... I could just keep it all together in a single PHP file.
I'm wondering if there's any performance impact of using a larger vs. smaller file for include() in this context? For example, is there any performance difference between a 200KB file and a 20KB file?
Thank you.
There will be a difference, between a 200KB and a 20KB file... But you will probably not notice it : a 200KB file is not that big -- and you generally use a lot of files that are not "small", when you're building a big application.
There are two things that take time, when you're loading a
.php
file :As a sidnote : in a general situation, you'll gain a lot more time/cpu/resources optimizing your SQL queries, or adding some caching mecanism, than thinking about that kind of stuff.
There is certainly an impact, so be sure to use include_once() instead of include(). You could maybe consider using APC which has an include cache.
Be careful with
include_once()
(and alsorequire_once()
), it is more expensive to run thaninclude()
. Every timeinclude_once()
is run, PHP does a lookup against an internal index of already included files before deciding whether to load the file or not. The more includes in the index, the slower this lookup is. Also when usinginclude()
orinclude_once()
try to use absolute paths where possible as this is much speedier than relative paths because you are not forcing PHP to work out the absolute path for you. As ggiroux said, some form of caching like APC will reap massive rewards and render worrying about how many include calls you have irrelevant (largely) (unless you have some poorly written code).EDIT--
Worrying about the above calls is only an issue once you to start have several thousand
requires
orincludes
in your codebase.