Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:74033 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 5642 invoked from network); 7 May 2014 19:49:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 7 May 2014 19:49:53 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 108.166.43.99 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 108.166.43.99 smtp99.ord1c.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [108.166.43.99] ([108.166.43.99:44817] helo=smtp99.ord1c.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id C0/B1-30354-F5E8A635 for ; Wed, 07 May 2014 15:49:52 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp5.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 5F8C31B077D; Wed, 7 May 2014 15:49:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp5.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id C26411B0523; Wed, 7 May 2014 15:49:48 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <536A8E5C.4020606@sugarcrm.com> Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 12:49:48 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dmitry Stogov , Ferenc Kovacs CC: Zeev Suraski , Sebastian Bergmann , "internals@lists.php.net" References: <5369CED9.5010001@php.net> <4339111475046055305@unknownmsgid> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] phpng: Refactored PHP Engine with Big Performance Improvement From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > I recently converted apache2handler to support phpng and it's appeared > significantly slower than FastCGI and FPM. Do we know why? I would assume since FastCGI has additional data hop (between webserver and the actual PHP binary) Apache one would be faster but looks like it's not so. It'd be interesting to know why. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227