4 ms·

That sounds grossly ineffective. Reminds me of some production PHP I saw once, returned the entire database (`SELECT * from 'db'`) and manually walked through

by nwh 13y ago

That sounds grossly ineffective. Reminds me of some production PHP I saw once, returned the entire database (`SELECT * from 'db'`) and manually walked through it with a for() loop. It wasn't very efficient at scale.

encoderer 13y ago
Yeah, you're right... It's way better to do expensive joins on the database where horizontal scalability is just a fantasy than in the shared-nothing www frontends that can be duplicated in clusters ad infinitum. If you're building SomeSimpleBasicSite.com and you do this, you're probably a bad programmer. If you're truly facing scalability problems, it's table stakes. Based on your comments in this thread you're out of your depth, man.
- nwh 13y ago
  I still can't imagine not find an example of where anybody would want to return 500MB of results to PHP for processing.
  - AaronIG 13y ago
    I think Kiro meant 500, as in the HTTP status code, due to PHP running out of memory, not 500MB.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]