Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:71324 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 70023 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2014 14:18:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 20 Jan 2014 14:18:21 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=johannes@schlueters.de; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=johannes@schlueters.de; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain schlueters.de from 217.114.215.10 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: johannes@schlueters.de X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.114.215.10 mail.experimentalworks.net Received: from [217.114.215.10] ([217.114.215.10:37927] helo=mail.experimentalworks.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 99/0D-02192-B203DD25 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 09:18:20 -0500 Received: from [192.168.2.31] (ppp-93-104-18-34.dynamic.mnet-online.de [93.104.18.34]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: johannes@schlueters.de) by mail.experimentalworks.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6E80D3FED6; Mon, 20 Jan 2014 15:18:51 +0100 (CET) To: Yasuo Ohgaki Cc: Bas van Beek , "internals@lists.php.net" In-Reply-To: References: <52DCDDDB.70000@tobin.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 15:18:06 +0100 Message-ID: <1390227486.3439.134.camel@guybrush> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE] Introduce session.lock, session.lazy_write and session.lazy_destory From: johannes@schlueters.de (Johannes =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Schl=FCter?=) On Mon, 2014-01-20 at 17:42 +0900, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > Hi Bas, > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Bas van Beek wrote: > > > I see only one very simple function potentially being helpful. A simple > > session close without write maybe called session_close(). This would give > > a performance bonus as it will not need to serialize the session data and > > write it back to session storage. It also helps to programmer in cases > > that he wants to guarantee that the session store is not changed by > > script (similar to a transaction abort). > > > > I have already added this as session_abort(). > Since it's only in 5.6 and master branch, the name could be changed. > However, session_abort() (or something like session_discard()) would be > better name because the name implies it does not save data. > > If you come up with better name, please let me know. I think those two are useful: - session_abort() - close session, do *not* write, unlock file - session_close() - close session, *do* write, unlock file I do think this also should be application defined, not configuration defined. So using functions for that is better than ini options. Only the individual script nows what it needs, global configuration for tuning one application will break another on the same system and makes it harder to write portable appliations. johannes