Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:81963
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.180 as permitted sender)
Sender: Michael Wallner <mike.php.net@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <54D3D51C.8070108@php.net>
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 21:39:56 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>, 
 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> <54D3D26A.6050405@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <54D3D26A.6050405@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC] [DISCUSSION] pecl_http
From: mike@php.net (Michael Wallner)

Hi Stas!

On 05/02/15 21:28, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> 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.
> 

Uhm, I'm not sure I understand :-? Weren't I supposed to measure exacly
that? Let me know, if you wanted something else to be compared.

-- 
Regards,
Mike