Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:57307 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 69952 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2012 17:15:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 9 Jan 2012 17:15:04 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=rasmus@lerdorf.com; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=rasmus@lerdorf.com; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lerdorf.com from 209.85.161.170 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: rasmus@lerdorf.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.161.170 mail-gx0-f170.google.com Received: from [209.85.161.170] ([209.85.161.170:47658] helo=mail-gx0-f170.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 5E/45-46289-6902B0F4 for ; Mon, 09 Jan 2012 12:15:03 -0500 Received: by ggnv1 with SMTP id v1so1735036ggn.29 for ; Mon, 09 Jan 2012 09:14:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.43.50.67 with SMTP id vd3mr17726126icb.10.1326129299275; Mon, 09 Jan 2012 09:14:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.200.5] (c-50-131-44-225.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [50.131.44.225]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h9sm253087868ibh.11.2012.01.09.09.14.57 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 09 Jan 2012 09:14:58 -0800 (PST) Sender: Rasmus Lerdorf Message-ID: <4F0B2091.7080301@php.net> Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 09:14:57 -0800 Organization: PHP Development Team User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111124 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Xinchen Hui CC: Stefan Esser , Pierre Joye , PHP internals , =?UTF-8?B?Sm9oYW5uZXMgU2NobMO8dGVy?= , Laruence References: <6268389813742875794@unknownmsgid> <6614496271356606712@unknownmsgid> In-Reply-To: <6614496271356606712@unknownmsgid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: 5.3.9, Hash DoS, release From: rasmus@php.net (Rasmus Lerdorf) On 01/09/2012 08:50 AM, Xinchen Hui wrote: > Hi: > I am not sure whether you have understood my point. > > If an array have more than 1024 buckets in an same bucket > list(same index), there must already be an performance issue. The problem is you really need to consider the source. There are many places where people deal with huge datasets. If they assign it directly they shouldn't hit any limits or we would need some sort of "large array" hint which would be nasty. -Rasmus