Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:65333 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 76876 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2013 09:12:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 29 Jan 2013 09:12:36 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=hufeng1987@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=hufeng1987@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.220.45 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: hufeng1987@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.220.45 mail-pa0-f45.google.com Received: from [209.85.220.45] ([209.85.220.45:46955] helo=mail-pa0-f45.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id CD/A0-07604-38297015 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 04:12:36 -0500 Received: by mail-pa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id bg2so276223pad.18 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 01:12:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=DS2J6aq73MkNANk8uS8sRbVQ1ZUetf4JDPWo4GJ2dA4=; b=oH8g0lQXasmZCRP5w0bdUzQuG9OVDeSbN1yeXtnNUsmBqcS89ONX/E0ewDo6hl8+KO FqmGspr7C/4Se8P3AOtIiPsN2vk7rHipK7EnNLJPYjBkT54jDIHvEKAJNOIgW6Yvbowu jXMa1tGfnY+/UTkZRsOapvLEI3+Eth+ERJJs48KJhMhcy+bVsqpGjbPhkEW5N4UPSX0Z DGkhe/5yUubCU4ULZJ+H6s5W8Yuz/2IcYWxE9R4W17pG7arnWzgafLuhwlGT21lTgyaO XNKTwIb+6vDJ1+3XS7zX/IrUzklZmLJAguvWwt0buBiD3BEukUg3Y98NaWI+oDAHoNvo v7dw== X-Received: by 10.66.84.232 with SMTP id c8mr1163883paz.8.1359450752602; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 01:12:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.192] ([111.173.224.82]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ho4sm8045625pbc.54.2013.01.29.01.12.29 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 29 Jan 2013 01:12:31 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <5107925E.7060006@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 17:11:58 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Zeev Suraski CC: internals@lists.php.net References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] ZTS - why are you using it? From: hufeng1987@gmail.com (netroby) On 2013/1/29 17:03, Zeev Suraski wrote: > I didn’t want to hijack the Optimizer+ thread so I’m creating a new one, > based on the apparent level of interest in ZTS. This isn’t an RFC to > remove ZTS by any stretch, but I **am** a bit confused about why people are > still using ZTS. > > > > A bit of background. I started the ZTS project (based on initial work by > Shane Caraveo more than a decade ago), and invested countless hours in > pushing it all throughout PHP. So I really hold absolutely no grudge > against it, quite the contrary… However, many years ago, I came to the > conclusion that it was a bit of a lost cause trying to weed out all the > thread safety issues from everywhere – and that a simpler, more elegant > solution exists in the form of FastCGI. > > > > Which brings me to the subject of this mail – why are you using ZTS PHP > instead of single threaded PHP? The reasons not to use it are few but > fairly major – it’s significantly slower than the non-ZTS PHP, and it’s > significantly less robust in the sense that a single bug somewhere can > bring down an entire server (or at least a bunch of many different > threads). What are your reasons to choose it over FastCGI? > > > > Zeev > Old behavior not easily to be changed. let it as it be, all of us like to keep on old behavior as it was. should put banner on php.net, say: do not using ZTS, that's old way. -- Appreciate your time. ---------------------------- Netroby