0

On every install I have P&T field pack and Matrix installed. blindly.

just recently I had to analyse a site's performance, and the only spike in load times I discovered was P&T add-ons.

(0.081127 / 20.43MB) Calling Extension Class/Method: Matrix_ext/channel_entries_tagdata
(0.251239 / 21.99MB) Calling Extension Class/Method: Pt_field_pack_ext/channel_entries_tagdata

it this always the case?

it uses 1.5 MB of memory and 0.17s...
this seams a lot?

is matrix using that much resources or is it the field_pack? or am I not interpreting the numbers correctly...

cheers
stefan

3

You didn't provide what the numbers were without Matrix or P&T Field Pack. But it also looks like you're posting the progression data. Generally speaking, calls to extensions and add-ons will jump the memory usage and progress time. But I wouldn't consider that a large jump, by any means.

A page using almost nothing can take up 8MB of memory to load. I've talked to a few ISPs and while they WON'T say what an average is, they will say, page/template loads under 24MB are fine, preferred even, since these days of growing web applications frequently use far more than that, and they're expecting to keep the server running smoothly, when the developer has created laborious code.

Here's a progression sample form one of the sites, we run. The jump when 'Assets' is called is almost 4MB memory.

(0.088663 / 13.76MB) -> Method Called: entries
(0.198751 / 17.92MB) Calling Extension Class/Method: Assets_ext/channel_entries_query_result
(0.244685 / 20.07MB) Calling Extension Class/Method: Favorites_ext/parse_favorites_date
(0.246708 / 20.11MB) Calling Extension Class/Method: Gmap_ext/channel_entries_tagdata
(0.248493 / 20.16MB) Calling Extension Class/Method: Matrix_ext/channel_entries_tagdata
(0.279621 / 20.40MB) Calling Extension Class/Method: Gmap_ext/channel_entries_tagdata_end
(0.279966 / 20.30MB) -> Data Returned
(0.280127 / 20.25MB) - End Tag Processing 

But the finally details are, the page is processed in under 0.33 seconds and uses less than 22MB Memory. Plus it loads pretty darn fast. The page with specified data, loads in 0.7946 seconds, with around 42 queries, some items on the page are cached, total memory used is 22.4MB.

So it's very dependent. But generally speaking, no that's not bad.

1

There is a new(ish) version of P&T Field Pack -- available on Github. Download ZIP from Github

I saw this mentioned by Brandon on a P&T Get Satisfaction thread.

I just did the upgrade. The instructions (Docs are included with the Zip) tell you that if you are upgrading, first disable the P&T FieldPack extensions. Then install the latest in your expressionengine/third_party folder.

Voilà! Your Template Debugging will no longer have lines like this in it:

Calling Extension Class/Method: Pt_field_pack_ext/channel_entries_tagdata
0

Yes, this is always the case when certain add-ons are installed. The amount of memory use will grow based on the amount of data returned by your Channel Entries call(s) with any add-on that uses the channel_entries_tagdata hook.

See also: Matrix_ext/channel_entries_tagdata

0

Also don't forget that if you have a Playa field that is looking at channel(s) with a lot of entries, it may cause significant performance issues.

Try reducing the overall number of options/entries from the default "ALL" to a lesser number, starting with 1,000 and go lower if issues continue.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.