Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:48859 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 26441 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2010 20:56:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 20 Jun 2010 20:56:32 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=tyra3l@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=tyra3l@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.214.42 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: bad X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: tyra3l@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.214.42 mail-bw0-f42.google.com Received: from [209.85.214.42] ([209.85.214.42:41326] helo=mail-bw0-f42.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 3A/F1-15307-9708E1C4 for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 16:56:26 -0400 Received: by bwz1 with SMTP id 1so864595bwz.29 for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 13:56:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:sender:received :in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=ixkMOUSnpOGrw6djXlP1DhENY0FUIFJ7nNB03QR9uxY=; b=J6AEld4oTk345k213x1Z2JYCZsyHdHT+zGLI9sVAwQuv3yliGGnPZ8Zuf2uez8M2MG O2BkixPprK4I+8sMAbXwi/dNU5GHU9gPWMP5s7O2n0x3dhokVKq55xHDySvklMJctkcN 8VJugDYHI5MeXvjLSaYUxf1nnkGWoHeUds+m4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=JG1TCjbtK6X7fEe9e5xsDhiSldwtKdwJWjVwhAD6EWaUEWD7fxbsmmEB2zWjiO4qZ6 JTtqvPoAzbIxJwC+vKdz1jtbk34RKZrAZiU7tz1iFdFx7oa+bJK7jC2ZI1AZ7aIO2/tt oGHrzPCGAWhBYxbzWZsHUH5tInkqJmglYAE1w= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.81.129 with SMTP id x1mr2195628bkk.95.1277067382635; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 13:56:22 -0700 (PDT) Sender: tyra3l@gmail.com Received: by 10.204.78.201 with HTTP; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 13:56:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4C1E784C.8010300@lsces.co.uk> Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 22:56:22 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ScWbtRAYETNeh7KxKATg8BxHPrg Message-ID: To: Lukas Kahwe Smith Cc: Lester Caine , PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d7ef9db23d4e04897c6b55 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] APC in trunk From: info@tyrael.hu (Ferenc Kovacs) --0016e6d7ef9db23d4e04897c6b55 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 10:39 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote: > > On 20.06.2010, at 22:21, Lester Caine wrote: > > > ( Foregot to change address again :( ) > > Ilia Alshanetsky wrote: > >> What are your views on including APC in the core, or reasons not to? > > > > Dictatorship? > > Optional module which have well used alternatives should not be proced on > by default! Probably more people use alternatives and have for years? > > > probably not actually .. my guess is that the vast majority of users do not > use any byte code cache today. this could be our effort to reduce co2 > emissions world wide. > Are you sure? Usually installing an opcode cache is the first optimalization effort for every php project. I'ts easy, it's transparent, and can give a vast amount of performance boost, so - shared hosting providers install it, because they can oversell more - ppl who can run dedicated server/vps usually knowledgeable enough to install it right away > > +1 on adding apc to trunk > +0 about enabling apc by default .. or rather undecided at this point. > > I prefer xcache, but I think that its better adding apc to the core, than nothing at all. Why should this be disabled by default? I never had any problem using xcache. Maybe that it has no gain if you only use php for cli or cgi. Tyrael --0016e6d7ef9db23d4e04897c6b55--