Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:73186
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain devilix.net designates 209.85.160.171 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAGa2bXZiBuw_L_ehvTZb5_UUedtbS0n4GXYUjtKix0S9DX_8KQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPhkiZw5xWRkc=ofh-nB5ZkjfThZFkH_+pK5RZaQFLKhno7u7A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGa2bXZiBuw_L_ehvTZb5_UUedtbS0n4GXYUjtKix0S9DX_8KQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 03:27:24 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPhkiZyGPDjfTXWSpJ4DgHa4xk_F5s0Jrtk8WBAnRm3nE_BBvA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net>
Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Revert/extend/postpone original RFC about
 read_only, lazy_write sessions
From: narf@devilix.net (Andrey Andreev)

> "lazy_write" is not accepted. So you don't need to mention it in the RFC.

Yes, it is.
People (including yourself) have voted +1 for "Read only, lazy write option".

> "read_only" option is better/much faster version of "session_start();
> session_commit()".
> If the name "read_only" is confusing, better name would be appreciated.

I know what it is, Yasuo ... half of the RFC is about it, please read
it carefully.

> "write short cut" is there, since it does not affect
> existing behavior
> nor save handlers at all.

The public probably doesn't know what "write short cut" is, because
it's only mentioned in a separate discussion.
So, for the public, it is this: https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=17860

... or in other words, a non-optional version of 'lazy_write'.

It does affect current functionality ... it's described in the RFC as
'lazy_write'.

Regards,
Andrey.