Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:81962
Return-Path: <smalyshev@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 62348 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2015 20:28:45 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 5 Feb 2015 20:28:45 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@gmail.com; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.220.51 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@gmail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.220.51 mail-pa0-f51.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.220.51] ([209.85.220.51:33799] helo=mail-pa0-f51.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id E1/AA-27691-B72D3D45 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 15:28:43 -0500
Received: by mail-pa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id hz1so7515897pad.10
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 12:28:40 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject
         :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=PaS5U+aCxNHlIr8kOnwtR5zEFgWeRyAm2fg/KOTwTNU=;
        b=HsM/nKW+ltrIizJ5MdPfrF+59B6z+MfntRawqP3We77b4EsYPxMxpYUtat710jigFb
         NUlCBGUQnNrFpsOeTyNgorgQYhoIE/mrPuxntZTTB0g925HUkHB5zFfzeHVVbS4DyO1g
         SCculWlNnzdVgSNbOnwv/eUVX+lxAS5ATpZ8apQ+TV919UrYQEKRsQviHme0sRLci2KV
         YB2kOoa1WfNcCQsSRC0aAgtgOX1ERabdJ1tC/63QgJxYbgj9Wa88V0sOgTAuYw7XAb9D
         njNbcGAqx7cegGhhqnTVBj7SagYzVAj7SPhhSUd3WYKFXOQryFTj8XtUL8CqGZXrYzTB
         maHA==
X-Received: by 10.68.181.69 with SMTP id du5mr8360609pbc.157.1423168120155;
        Thu, 05 Feb 2015 12:28:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Stas-Air.local (108-66-6-48.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net. [108.66.6.48])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id di10sm5937377pad.41.2015.02.05.12.28.38
        (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
        Thu, 05 Feb 2015 12:28:39 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <54D3D26A.6050405@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 12:28:26 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Michael Wallner <mike@php.net>, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>
CC: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <DDA98D4F-2105-415A-B921-01A622091FA9@php.net>	<54D217E7.8030407@php.net>	<54D2AE91.8090800@gmail.com>	<54D3271E.2080207@php.net> <CAEZPtU65NirGfES1qiic45Ui3qY45X+k370o2BSj3kbwLendjg@mail.gmail.com> <54D3CE01.4070903@php.net>
In-Reply-To: <54D3CE01.4070903@php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http
From: smalyshev@gmail.com (Stanislav Malyshev)

Hi!

> Does the following kcachegrind screenshot give an idea (I used a minimum
> node cost of 10% to simplify the graph)?
> 
> Left is raphf enabled (24M Ir) and on the right raphf disabled (35M Ir):
> http://dev.iworks.at/ext-http/raphf.png
> 
> Have a look on the top-most far-right highlighted block, which is solely
> devoted to tearing up curl instances when raphf is disabled.

I still don't understand why the comparison is made against worst
possible implementation (going through all connection cycle every time)
as opposed to logical implementation of HTTP connection object
supporting keepalive.

-- 
Stas Malyshev
smalyshev@gmail.com