Alpha performance compared PHP and Adobe Coldfusion 2018 interpreter

[kkfin]

I did little test of the performance of Alpha Anywhere interpreter compared to PHP and Adobe ColdFusion 2018.

The code I did use was very simple.

Alpha

dim i as N
i = 0
while (i < 100000000)
i= i + 1
end while
showvar(i)

PHP(5.6)

$i = 0;
while($i < 100000000) {
    $i++;
}
echo $i;

Adobe ColdFusion 2018

<cfset i = 0> 
<cfloop condition = "i LESS THAN 100000000"> 
<cfset i = i + 1> 
</cfloop>
<cfoutput>#i#</cfoutput>

It may be good to note that php 5.6 which I did use is much slower that php 7.


The result in same machine was

PHP 9 sec
ColdFusion 2018 25 sec
Alpha Anywhere unfortunately did not manage test at all.

Maybe you have better success with AA.

Ken

[mikeallenbrown]

Re: Alpha performance compared PHP and Adobe Coldfusion 2018 interpreter

I don't see a question in this post.

*shrug*

[Davidk]

Re: Alpha performance compared PHP and Adobe Coldfusion 2018 interpreter

I think it's a time comparison of running a loop 100 million times among disparate systems. Although I'm never really sure.

I do think it's really good to know that php 7 is faster than php 5.6. I would be worried if a version 2 years older was faster.

[mikeallenbrown]

Re: Alpha performance compared PHP and Adobe Coldfusion 2018 interpreter

Yeah, I understand the time comparison. Just wasn't sure what to do make of it. How does this help Alpha developers? What does this mean for me? I guess what I'm asking is: what's the point here? I don't mean to sound like a jerk, because that's not my intention. I just don't get the post.

EDIT: The alpha loop does finish after 6-7 minutes ...lol

[Davidk]

Re: Alpha performance compared PHP and Adobe Coldfusion 2018 interpreter

How did I know you were going to run that Alpha loop... too funny. I ran it as well. Not sure how it did not manage in the first post... but mine ran in a lightning 4 minutes 17 seconds.

[iRadiate]

Re: Alpha performance compared PHP and Adobe Coldfusion 2018 interpreter

I got 9 minutes and 4 seconds

[Davidk]

Re: Alpha performance compared PHP and Adobe Coldfusion 2018 interpreter

Well... it's not always about how fast you get there...

[kkfin]

Re: Alpha performance compared PHP and Adobe Coldfusion 2018 interpreter

Obviously you do not get speed with Alpha you get time:)

Alphas interpreter has clearly a big performance problem.
Unfortunately this lack of performance gets worse/has more impact in multi user environment like mobile or web.

[madtowng]

Re: Alpha performance compared PHP and Adobe Coldfusion 2018 interpreter

86 ms using javascript, a bit longer using xbasic.
2019-02-15_2-01-34.png

[kkfin]

Re: Alpha performance compared PHP and Adobe Coldfusion 2018 interpreter

I did also same test using Adobe ColdFusion 2016. It was about 27% slower than 2018 version and confirms so Adobes claims about better performance in version 2018.

I tested Asp.Net Web Forms(4.6.1 C#) and it also did basically fail like Alpha. It did somehow surprise me but confirms why the traffic is from Asp.Net Web Forms to other platforms. On the other hand MS has new platform Asp.Net Core which I did not test but seems to be the fastest framework available currently.

I also did test Rad Studio 10.3 Delphi and the result was immediate ( under 1 sec).


Ken

[mumfie]

Re: Alpha performance compared PHP and Adobe Coldfusion 2018 interpreter

I tested Asp.Net Web Forms(4.6.1 C#) and it also did basically fail like Alpha. It did somehow surprise me but confirms why the traffic is from Asp.Net Web Forms to other platforms. On the other hand MS has new platform Asp.Net Core which I did not test but seems to be the fastest framework available currently.

Ken

FYI
I tested Net core 2.1 with minimal console app which takes approx 0.247 seconds using following code

static void Main(string[] args)
        {
            Console.WriteLine("NET Core 2.1");
            Stopwatch stopwatch = new Stopwatch();
            stopwatch.Start();
            int i = 0;
            while (i < 100000000)
            {
                i = i + 1;
            }
            stopwatch.Stop();
            Console.WriteLine("i: {0}", i);
            Console.WriteLine("Time elapsed seconds: {0}", stopwatch.Elapsed.TotalSeconds);
            Console.ReadKey();

        }

[DickJames]

Re: Alpha performance compared PHP and Adobe Coldfusion 2018 interpreter

I've been using Alpha since 2005, when I did comparisons between VB, Access and Filemaker. I didn't choose Alpha because it could finish a loop in the shortest time. I chose Alpha because it could deliver a finished application in the shortest time.

[RichCPT]

Re: Alpha performance compared PHP and Adobe Coldfusion 2018 interpreter

… Alphas interpreter has clearly a big performance problem. …

But in all fairness, there are at least two other things to consider here: 1) Is there a speed different between running in the Interactive window Control in Alpha vs. running under the actual Alpha Web server, and 2) how does the CPU utilization compare between the various methods? It could be that Alpha is yielding a lot more CPU time to other processes where as PHP and Cold Fusion might be hogging more CPU time and making other things sluggish.

[kkfin]

Re: Alpha performance compared PHP and Adobe Coldfusion 2018 interpreter

The loop test tests performance. It is a standard test.

[Davidk]

Re: Alpha performance compared PHP and Adobe Coldfusion 2018 interpreter

Is it not a standard test. It is an isolated test which has nothing to do with performance of software or a web server or a cpu. Where do you get this stuff? Yikes.