Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:66156
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.223.180 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <51276A25.8020101@ellisons.org.uk>
References: <CAHHbRnEUVcGqH6+++CWXM6XWobJn5MzKxLdfX9RHxoJ0uXaZdg@mail.gmail.com>
	<51229088.90306@lerdorf.com>
	<5122DA51.6090606@sugarcrm.com>
	<5122DBA9.2010004@lerdorf.com>
	<5122E00F.80409@sugarcrm.com>
	<5122E451.1040308@lerdorf.com>
	<CAHHbRnEZo9nmon+yhvnEW0t2FFV_veBXzkSdDjDXEvpfet141A@mail.gmail.com>
	<5126B009.4090203@lerdorf.com>
	<5126BE9D.2060507@ellisons.org.uk>
	<5126C267.2000806@lerdorf.com>
	<51274EC2.7090108@ellisons.org.uk>
	<CAH-PCH5=f_iEV8JYbLYDU6XkmcPu=gAmtn-LgoVZxPWoVDDj2g@mail.gmail.com>
	<51276A25.8020101@ellisons.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 16:06:41 +0100
Message-ID: <CAH-PCH45RHpbVCtq-mVv_aPYiA1gEx14iFn8GsNo7NoLJE-1Kw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Terry Ellison <Terry@ellisons.org.uk>
Cc: Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com>, Brendon Colby <brendon@newgrounds.com>, 
	Daniel Zoltak <daniel@zoltak.com>, "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae93408c5f85bd604d6518988
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP causing high number of NFS getattr operations?
From: tyra3l@gmail.com (Ferenc Kovacs)

--14dae93408c5f85bd604d6518988
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Terry Ellison <Terry@ellisons.org.uk>wrote=
:

>  On 22/02/13 11:20, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>
>
>   My challenge is deciding (i) do I work on PHP 5.6 / 5.7 and the
>> corresponding beta APC version which at current rates of adoption might
>> have begin to have an impact in the community sometime in the next 5 yea=
rs,
>> or (ii) work on a performance patch to the stable APC version which is
>> typically installed with PHP 5.3 which these guys could apply within a f=
ew
>> months.
>>
>
>  or contribute those patches back and integrate them into the vanilla apc=
?
>
> Humm.   I think that we are sort of saying the same thing, but at cross
> purposes. Of course I should offer any up patches for mainstream APC and =
at
> best these will go into 3.1.14 or 3.1.15 and may then get adopted sometim=
e
> for production systems whenever -- that's only if the release of a core O=
+
> doesn't drop APC into legacy status.
>

no comment on that, but I'm expecting/hoping that we will keep apc alive at
least until we have supported versions where O+ isn't in the core (5.3 and
5.4).


>
> However Ubuntu 12.04-LTS is a good example of a stable production stack
> and this uses PHP 5.3.10 and APC 3.1.7.  Debian Squeeze is even further
> behind and it runs PHP 5.3.3 and APC 3.1.3.
>
> A performance patch could also be made available based on the last stable
> version of APC, say 3.1.9 -- that is before the attempts to support the n=
ew
> PHP 5.4 features destabilised it.  With this patch, then at least
> individual system admins would have the option to download a stable versi=
on
> from PECL + patch  it to use with their production stacks within the next
> 3-6 months.
>

I still think that it would be better kept as a release, and that we should
try to have a release which is stable with both 5.3 and 5.4, but it's
easier said than done.

--=20
Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu

--14dae93408c5f85bd604d6518988--