Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:50170 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 13760 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2010 15:52:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 12 Nov 2010 15:52:58 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=scott@macvicar.net; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=scott@macvicar.net; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain macvicar.net from 97.107.131.220 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: scott@macvicar.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 97.107.131.220 whisky.macvicar.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [97.107.131.220] ([97.107.131.220:56642] helo=whisky.macvicar.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 9E/20-09586-9D26DDC4 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 10:52:57 -0500 Received: from [172.17.18.127] (unknown [213.242.106.126]) by whisky.macvicar.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B3C6468CC; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 10:35:28 -0500 (EST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 15:35:26 +0000 Cc: PHP internals Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <8E77FAA0-A827-4BA2-8800-7DBF0F3C8D79@macvicar.net> References: To: Kenan Sulayman X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] GPU Acceleration From: scott@macvicar.net (Scott MacVicar) Do you have a patch for this? The only thing stopping it is no one had = written it. - Scott On Nov 12, 2010, at 3:23 PM, Kenan Sulayman wrote: > Hello out there! >=20 > I just asked myself, just like that: Why shouldn't it be possible to = create > a php-work flow which allows the immediate parallelization over GPU to = make, > for instance, the execution a hundredth times higher? >=20 > I mean, well - yes it sounds like a stupid idea, we've got 6 = GPU-Horses ( > servers with Radeon 5970 x2 ) and they could deliver blazing = performance. > We could be a gazillion times be better in serving or processing = content. > Right? *even thought it's meant to be parallelization, we could = rewrite the > code..* >=20 > So, I'd thank you for *constructive* answers. >=20 > Cheers, > -- > (c) *Kenan Sulayman* > *Freelance Designer and Programmer* >=20 > *Life's Live Poetry*