Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:33661
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com designates 212.25.124.162 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <47559315.1030106@zend.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 09:49:09 -0800
Organization: Zend Technologies
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Gregory Beaver <greg@chiaraquartet.net>
CC: Brian Shire <shire@tekrat.com>, scott.mcnaught@synergy8.com, 
 'internals Mailing List' <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <4731278C.8020301@chiaraquartet.net> <4731F977.4080502@zend.com> <4753B087.4020206@chiaraquartet.net> <003601c83582$a1b16fc0$e5144f40$@mcnaught@synergy8.com> <4754807B.80408@zend.com> <EB453794-73CB-4756-BB60-AA53A3EF13FA@tekrat.com> <4754E2A0.5090103@chiaraquartet.net>
In-Reply-To: <4754E2A0.5090103@chiaraquartet.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] ignored patches
From: stas@zend.com (Stanislav Malyshev)

> no APC, with APC, and with APC and apc.stat=0.  The benchmark in
> question compared require_once to include with full paths to a single
> file.  In the best case, I got a 12% performance difference between
> include with full paths and apc.stat=0 and a single file.

12% sounds more realistic than 45%, definitely. Now what exactly the 
application you benchmarked did besides includes? Was it a real-life 
app? Which one?

> What is particularly irksome about this whole nightmare is the
> combination of "prove it you little peon" attitude and the fact that it

It has nothing to do with "little peon". You argue that we need some 
language-level change to improve performance (and it is the only reason 
to add it). It is suspected that this language change has very high 
abuse potential, so we need to be sure this performance improvement is 
real and worth the troubles that this feature brings. Otherwise even 
considering it is pointless - if we have no real performance improvement 
on real applications, what worth it?
I still think namespace syntax is not the right place to improve 
performance, but if I have real-life data it might be an argument for it.

> .phpt tests.  If the decision is to ignore input, I would really rather

Please stop it. If your single proposal is not accepted, it's not 
"decision to ignore input". There are a lot of proposals to PHP 
improvement, some of them get accepted, some of them get rejected. 
Anybody who is interested in developing PHP and proposes anything with 
any frequency is bound to have his share of proposals rejected, and 
inevitably he would feel hurt - if he didn't think it's an excellent 
proposal, he wouldn't propose it.
You can claim that some of them are rejected mistakenly, and it's a 
valid difference of opinion. But claim that your input was ignored, 
after extensive discussion and multiple verbose explanations of the 
reasons to you is plain false.

> that say: I've already proven there's a performance difference, the ball
> is in *your* court to prove (with benchmark) that I am wrong.

Proving the negative is impossible. You can't prove there's no 
performance improvement on some application under some condition - doing 
this would require one to convert all existing applications to single 
file and test them in all possible environments. However, proving real 
life application difference would require only one application being 
tested.
-- 
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
stas@zend.com   http://www.zend.com/
(408)253-8829   MSN: stas@zend.com