Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:73203
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain devilix.net designates 209.85.213.53 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAGa2bXbH8WFp=8C-ON-1aAHLiyTsemVKMH+dGnqBSJAw5zw-GA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPhkiZw5xWRkc=ofh-nB5ZkjfThZFkH_+pK5RZaQFLKhno7u7A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGa2bXZiBuw_L_ehvTZb5_UUedtbS0n4GXYUjtKix0S9DX_8KQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<5324FE40.1070704@sugarcrm.com>
	<CAPhkiZy1oG_WHijMknB34dyo0aZRDU89EBafpaEGqGM32DCK0A@mail.gmail.com>
	<532603A0.8060802@sugarcrm.com>
	<CAPhkiZxdrxiKT3cTW9ra=0aFDKKP3-OpjmGdxqzHxu8YEUK2ww@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGa2bXbH8WFp=8C-ON-1aAHLiyTsemVKMH+dGnqBSJAw5zw-GA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 10:52:51 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPhkiZx52CiKkk385itjEtg99ox3PHzXga9ZWDPbWiB2wRyH4g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net>
Cc: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>, 
	"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)

Hi,

On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 2:09 AM, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohgaki@ohgaki.net> wrote:
> Hi Andrey,
>
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Andrey Andreev <narf@devilix.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> "last used", "last updated", "last modified", "last accessed" ...
>> >> however you call it, it always exists in some form. Without such a
>> >
>> > Last used and last modified are very different things. Nothing prevents
>> > one from tracking either. We need to check it is done properly and is
>> > compatible with old handlers, but it should be entirely possible to do
>> > it in a BC way.
>>
>> See, this is what I meant with 'read_only' it may be a name closely
>> explaining what it does, but in fact it has an essentially different
>> meaning. :) The session module only uses one of those timestamps is
>> what I meant here. And it may be possible to handle that in a BC way,
>> but the RFC doesn't mention if that's really the case and/or how it
>> could be done - this is stuff that must be addressed.
>
>
> It updates time stamp always.
>
> It does
>
> "write data if data is updated"
> or
> "write data if save handler does not have update API"
> or
> "update time stamp if it is needed" (e.g. memcache does not need to update
> time stamp since it updates time stamp by read. It's save handler
> implementation choice what to do with update API)
>
> For save handlers like memcahe/memcached, session module is writing back the
> same data just to waste resources when session data hasn't changed.

And what about userland session handlers?