Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:65352 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 9741 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2013 11:15:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 29 Jan 2013 11:15:57 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=pierre.php@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=pierre.php@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.54 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pierre.php@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.215.54 mail-la0-f54.google.com Received: from [209.85.215.54] ([209.85.215.54:63634] helo=mail-la0-f54.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 94/77-07604-C6FA7015 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 06:15:57 -0500 Received: by mail-la0-f54.google.com with SMTP id gw10so189735lab.41 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 03:15:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=5FAZJH7QkP69s54r4uaZseB6ZfYtdIlh4jdAbfAPc0M=; b=SH2fNdRITsusLHrzOyQW060rZwMeVwoc0xESckbMEemAaanhsAgWDjz1VsGXIsWwn9 567I//hIZ0PtEWCzqq7SOHwMcqAFnu9WJM3R0z+rBmktEKzIennEZG+afaOH4Hv8LDB3 djyXoJDaHsPzm+HNpTbZGCQFMtI1TnWKU1pVz61X9LFTf2E6anx56zIgpnm1aUILjGn/ uKBpX1CD2zxOnQQmrjG08pxlZrqSneNydv55GxSUPmjdbzT1a9zag6QXOyO3U/iVrtgy RLu9eTtnzVq+r4JzXMqZP3M3zmnG7JwPp0nXR8AF1GiWqLVB5n0WY7cukWoA6dKRstQ5 XiQQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.102.177 with SMTP id fp17mr827615lab.0.1359458153957; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 03:15:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.2.69 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 03:15:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.2.69 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 03:15:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 12:15:53 +0100 Message-ID: To: Zeev Suraski Cc: PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0408d69b5a87fd04d46b84a9 Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] ZTS - why are you using it? From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye) --f46d0408d69b5a87fd04d46b84a9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Jan 29, 2013 12:10 PM, "Zeev Suraski" wrote: > > > The other main reason from my side to keep ZTS is Windows. Windows > cannot > > perform well using process based SAPI. > > Windows actually works quite well with FastCGI. So well Microsoft even > created their own version for IIS. It's outperforming the ISAPI module by > a wide margin. Laziness and design mistake. Everything on windows (AD,IIS, asp.net, etc) uses thread. And no, nuts is not faster. I am not talking about PHP zts, but in general. > Other than Apache/Windows not having FastCGI support(*), I really can't > imagine any situation where using ZTS inside of a Web Server context makes > any sense at all. I wouldn't call it a new trend, it's both old (I've > been pushing for it since at least 2006, probably earlier) and with very > solid technical reasons (faster, more reliable). Miss the rest of my mail or? Current implementation is outdated and slow. > > Yes, TSRM is horrible and does not match modern thread safe > implementation > > (APC does it better for its usage f.e. using rwlock). > > Note that I wasn't talking about the implementation of ZTS, but why you > would want to use it in the first place. I actually think that using > thread local storage is much better than using locks - but if you can make > the whole problem disappear because there's no need for thread safety, > that's even better. Why heavily invest in something unless there's a very > good reason to use it? See what I wrote in my previous reply. Cheers, --f46d0408d69b5a87fd04d46b84a9--