Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:13482 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 68259 invoked by uid 1010); 23 Oct 2004 02:10:48 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 68183 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2004 02:10:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO thbmail.TradersHotel.com) (211.155.178.223) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 23 Oct 2004 02:10:47 -0000 Received: from [10.178.209.140] ([218.106.187.253]) by thbmail.TradersHotel.com (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.12) with ESMTP id 2004102310021663:6367 ; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 10:02:16 +0800 Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 18:50:01 -0700 (PDT) X-X-Sender: rasmus@t42p.lerdorf.com To: Ilia Alshanetsky cc: Derick Rethans , internals@lists.php.net In-Reply-To: <41797616.9030303@prohost.org> Message-ID: References: <417970E3.7080001@prohost.org> <41797423.4060405@dharana.net> <41797616.9030303@prohost.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on thbmail/THB(Release 5.0.12 |February 13, 2003) at 2004-10-23 10:02:16, Serialize by Router on thbmail/THB(Release 5.0.12 |February 13, 2003) at 2004-10-23 10:22:35, Serialize complete at 2004-10-23 10:22:35 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP 5.1 time() caching From: rasmus@php.net (Rasmus Lerdorf) On Fri, 22 Oct 2004, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote: > Derick Rethans wrote: > > For that the granularity is not good enough though. > > Ideally we'd have gettimeofday() cached, but looking @ the code it is > called on by lcg code and then only on MINIT. So we'd need an "extra" > syscall to provide this, I am not sure this is a good idea. > > Ilia > > P.S. I didn't indicate in my earlier e-mail, I'd prefer $_SERVER as well. Sticking it in $_SERVER is ok, but then you also have to hack up getenv() to recognize it and return it when asked. People interested in using this are likely people looking to avoid doing the extra syscall and these are the same people who are unlikely to populate $_SERVER at all in their configs. -Rasmus