Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:47736
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.218.216 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type;
        b=is0+gGu0nanz+Do/O1FBaGgpZ5it0N0VUWl4R+6ZcDyh+O+Vzmv6n7AZTim+N4vzPZ
         BvQAYB6nw1mzLjOCcPleTbUVyUFZsfshfb2mouGGLMU/qO3Bk0epHDvJelkS2dfStlTd
         raCJhMHoMHf8bp9qIvAT/rj9+prQUYp9z0tVk=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4BB59D29.7080100@lsces.co.uk>
References: <1941231697.20100401163215@gmail.com>
	 <g2i469956791004011604v210ad50dx89b65cd0d731cea7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <698DE66518E7CA45812BD18E807866CE03FA7EFF@us-ex1.zend.net>
	 <4BB59771.2050706@quis.cx> <4BB59D29.7080100@lsces.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 09:40:16 +0200
Message-ID: <l2sb54d0abe1004020040m29338df4g45e4c6ac88f4bc36@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0003255598762bde0c04833c17f6
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] php and multithreading (additional arguments)
From: tyra3l@gmail.com (Ferenc Kovacs)

--0003255598762bde0c04833c17f6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk> wrote:

> Jille Timmermans wrote:
>
>> Op 2-4-2010 7:16, Andi Gutmans schreef
>>
>>> I think that if we were ever to implement threading we would be best off
>>> to enable spawning worker threads that have their own context with no
>>> shared data (and therefore no requirement for locking). We could then
>>> have a message passing API between the threads.
>>> Advantages:
>>> - Real multi-threading.
>>> - Simple straightforward approach which doesn't require a comp. sci.
>>> degree to use correctly.
>>> - Very stable implementation.
>>>
>> That sounds like "I want threading; because it sounds cool!". What are
>> the advantages of this above multi-process?
>> The systemcall-overhead for message passing?
>>
>
> Actually Andi's outline forms a nice simple base for something practical.
> It simply builds on the 'background' threading required to run asynchronous
> operations while not creating a unmanageable mess. But I still can't see any
> need to go beyond perhaps asynchronous SQL queries.
>
> Or asynchronous exec, or asynchronous(or at least timout aware)
gethostbyaddr, see:
http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=51306
So any task, that require waiting on external resource could be executed in
paralel.
http://hu2.php.net/manual/en/mysqli.reap-async-query.php
its a good thing, that you can async mysql execution with mysqlnd.

Tyrael

> It still requires that all the non-thread safe code is addressed first?
> Even if that simply means disabling extensions that are not safe?
>
>
>  And why did nobody mention Aprils Fools yesterday; when the
>> request-for-threading was sent ;)
>>
> Because it was after noon when it was sent ;)
>
>
> --
> Lester Caine - G8HFL
> -----------------------------
> Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
> EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
> Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--0003255598762bde0c04833c17f6--