Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:55144 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 67737 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2011 10:21:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 3 Sep 2011 10:21:20 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ulf.wendel@phpdoc.de; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ulf.wendel@phpdoc.de; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain phpdoc.de from 212.227.126.171 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ulf.wendel@phpdoc.de X-Host-Fingerprint: 212.227.126.171 moutng.kundenserver.de Received: from [212.227.126.171] ([212.227.126.171:55564] helo=moutng.kundenserver.de) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 73/13-45280-E9FF16E4 for ; Sat, 03 Sep 2011 06:21:20 -0400 Received: from [192.168.2.26] (p5B06BAA6.dip.t-dialin.net [91.6.186.166]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrbap1) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MUlzw-1Qgxmg3mO4-00YLZ7; Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:21:15 +0200 Message-ID: <4E61FF98.7030402@phpdoc.de> Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:21:12 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: "internals@lists.php.net" References: <1314966424.2150.26.camel@guybrush> <4E60F712.4010901@lerdorf.com> <4E612BBA.2000509@oracle.com> <4E612D70.70606@sugarcrm.com> <4E616A8E.8040401@lerdorf.com> <4E617B3F.4080105@sugarcrm.com> <4E617C9B.1040504@lerdorf.com> <4E617E2B.7070507@sugarcrm.com> <4E618811.4010703@lerdorf.com> In-Reply-To: <4E618811.4010703@lerdorf.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:oMd9fBkcA963OXtsBSsnLbK9toXJxpWwpaybB1/rbmW 4bT0AJwmBn8VSPbADeIPWCM1B06UtjNbvZEjy5ujAQMpS5471I DJ1l2yIg49+mOSpbC77IrxJ6w8u/Tob9gtoYEI88H/GpeRXJQl JUh0mrO7YeDcfHAoH0JigFR5Op2mvY4Y2p8e9UgvisgM1GG3p4 mCT70tgRFe9L6K3PBqmkTJBI95ZkKr+xnO0UVGsWAW7w0jiv6N tB+Nowkq3TddwclKk2/Gcw70Zcw9d6Sx+6iy4Itq1rE226fOwT nzYsG6aCc7bBBtFw+D+eEs5iFR4lpenZvpp6nvQM3GYG1UfXvw IFyaOmfxMlJ3E+8NeijM= Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Make mysqlnd default over libmysql in 5.4 From: ulf.wendel@phpdoc.de (Ulf Wendel) Am 03.09.2011 03:51, schrieb Rasmus Lerdorf: > On 09/02/2011 06:08 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote: >> Hi! >> >> On 9/2/11 6:02 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: >>> Well, we are not trying to get to 0 failed tests in all permutations of >>> all extensions on all platforms. We are trying to get to 0 failed tests >>> on a common-case build using defaults and common extensions. Given that, >>> changing a default has an impact on the 0-failed-tests goal. >> >> Nobody talks about "all permutations of all platforms", let's not be >> absurd here. However, there's a distance between "all permutations of >> all platforms" and "we'll be ignoring failures on libmysql". libmysql >> *is* the common case build and the one most people would be running in >> production, at least as far as I see around. > > Ah yes, but is that because they have actively chosen to use libmysql or > is it because our default is libmysql. It is buggier and less robust > than mysqlnd at this point, at least in my experience, so who are we > helping by leaving libmysql as the default? ACK. Yes, it is about the default that others copy from php.net. (Yes, I consider mysqlnd stability to be at least on par with the libmysql and, mysqlnd is usually getting much faster bug fixes. Together with the set of free PHP license plugins (pecl/mysqlnd_*, query cache, replication support, load balancing, monitoring, ...), asynchronous/non-blocking queries, a nice debug trace log, copy-on-write variables, recognition of PHP's memory limit, ... it is worth a recommendation to users. Time to spread the news by switching the compile default. Five years after development started, four years after alpha and beta. Plus the PHP 5.3-series as an "incubation" time.) > Forget the failed tests. A new PHP release is about improving the > ecosystem. If the folks that maintain libmysql and mysqlnd suggest that > mysqlnd is more robust and it is the path forward, why would we resist > this? Do we not trust Oracle/MySQL enough to listen to their input? ACK. (For the last time in this thread: there are no plans to remove libmysql support but mysqlnd is the recommended choice.) Ulf