Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:69825
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.217.178 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAEZPtU5AGK2SGHqfpxAri+CwRrwz2E+k8Ad2gvk-dikQnC0_ZA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+9eiLtNLdrP-b5YymTfnEpMVhUXDHhZ7u15mbjyNNv9Ev1ePQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<52686702.80107@oracle.com>
	<CAEZPtU5AGK2SGHqfpxAri+CwRrwz2E+k8Ad2gvk-dikQnC0_ZA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 07:26:25 +0200
Message-ID: <CAEZPtU49s4KWWwLOqSvr3GQkbh9u1BeKAidWa3W2yNxUguyNpQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christopher Jones <christopher.jones@oracle.com>, 
	"Matt Ficken (Insight Global)" <v-mafick@microsoft.com>
Cc: Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com>, Julien Pauli <jpauli@php.net>, David Soria Parra <dsp@php.ne>, 
	Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>, PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Improved performance of array_maerge() and func_get_args()
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

fix Julien email

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 7:25 AM, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com> wrote:
> hi,
>
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 2:17 AM, Christopher Jones
> <christopher.jones@oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/23/2013 05:36 AM, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'm proposing two simple patches that eliminate a lot of useless zval
>>> copying.
>>> For example they remove only about 800 calls to zend_hash_copy() (25%) on
>>> each request to wordpress-3.6.0 home page and make it 2-4% faster.
>>>
>>> It's not a questions about master branch, but I think it is also safe to
>>> commit them into PHP-5.4 and PHP-5.5.
>>>
>>> Any objections?
>>>
>>> https://gist.github.com/dstogov/7117623
>>>
>>> https://gist.github.com/dstogov/7117649
>>>
>>> Thanks. Dmitry.
>>>
>>
>> I'd prefer PHP 5.4 was kept stable.
>>
>> Last time I suggested keeping PHP 5.4 stable [1], it wasn't, and the result
>> was
>> a performance regression [2].
>
> I tend to agree with Chris here, even for 5.5 :)
>
> However, Let me ask Matt to run our full tests suite against your
> patch, that may give us some numbers to discuss or confirm the safety
> of this patch.
>
> Matt? Can you run pftt, apps compat and perf tests using this patch pls?
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Pierre
>
> @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org



-- 
Pierre

@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org