here I will post my results from a test which I ran to check how much time adds zend_db_table to my code..
In
http://zfsite.andreinikolov.com/2008/08/zend_db_table-time-overhead-about-25-percents/ this post in my blog I have posted the full code for the tests and have described exactly what I have done. Here I will post just the results and the conclusion.
I will be happy if you have notes, arguments and remarks. If I miss something about Zend_Db_Table and do not use it in the best way - please do not hesitate to comment :)
I ran the test in 4 different variants. These 4 variants proved to distinguish one from another in the time they took to run.
These 4 variants are:
1) using Zend_Db_Table without metadata cache
2) using Zend_Db_Table with APC as metadata cache
3) writing the SQL queries directly in the controller, using direct Zend_Db_Adapter_Mysqli
4) writing the SQL queries in Model classes, using direct Zend_Db_Adapter_Mysqli
I tested with level of concurency 5 with 100 requests (ab -c 5 -n 100)
Requests per second:
method 3 - writing the SQL queries directly in the controller, using direct Zend_Db_Adapter_Mysqli: 12.93 rps
method 4 - writing the SQL queries in Model classes, using direct Zend_Db_Adapter_Mysqli: 12.66 rps
method 2 - using Zend_Db_Table with APC as metadata cache: 10.2 rps
method 1 - using Zend_Db_Table without metadata cache 9.2 rps
conclusion: Zend_Db_Table is not good for heavy loaded web applications. My personal choice is to go with something like variant 4. The time overhead here is minimal and the code in the controller is most readable.
