Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:81965 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 67233 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2015 20:46:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 5 Feb 2015 20:46:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@gmail.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.192.177 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.192.177 mail-pd0-f177.google.com Received: from [209.85.192.177] ([209.85.192.177:46528] helo=mail-pd0-f177.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 27/AB-27691-4B6D3D45 for ; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 15:46:46 -0500 Received: by pdjz10 with SMTP id z10so9935626pdj.13 for ; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 12:46:41 -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=mAxnB/N4tY1Jq88JsWAZwqVonutijBim7M4RHHFlwJA=; b=or4/PBbN9gfvyuG9YdJfH6RBZnveuC+HMITuF7gGgrwm2AIjC8m0sRUt5ADbwimqby N+oXwW1UFXL5+ZjQWLcCR8r/Ccj40MQdbnodksDWZfFnAX6UXQE8eD4uHm3UrEbW6TkI QYrC3IN2tR2mrysTC/pyzYJDu5A5SkEz2uzGqZGjo4xG13w0Lt0xSOR1RJUUj7dUw5Wn pYogOcAlxHD30SHpZ9BtIw5OmK6V0rir5HxYcDUwAEAq/kMeE0jcbcD3ZhHnmonhmxde N/vazf20FaK59FRjNettNXSQHG/qd2DOZ7Ii+u9O7TjlwOl9qR/LNrrvdZfu9NTIEs6k 1pEg== X-Received: by 10.66.140.77 with SMTP id re13mr7925025pab.153.1423169201658; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 12:46:41 -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 xw1sm5956637pac.47.2015.02.05.12.46.40 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 05 Feb 2015 12:46:41 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <54D3D6A4.3020908@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 12:46:28 -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 , Pierre Joye CC: PHP internals References: <54D217E7.8030407@php.net> <54D2AE91.8090800@gmail.com> <54D3271E.2080207@php.net> <54D3CE01.4070903@php.net> <54D3D26A.6050405@gmail.com> <54D3D51C.8070108@php.net> In-Reply-To: <54D3D51C.8070108@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! > 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. I wanted to know why we need persistent resources. You brought comparing persistent resources to reopening connection each time as an argument that we need persistent resources. This, however, is not a good argument for persistent resources, as the same performance improvement (or nearly the same, discounting the closing/opening between requests - which may be necessary anyway, see below) can be achieved without having persistent resources, just by implementing HTTP keepalive within the same connection object. It would also make it clearer who owns the connection and in which state it is, right now I'm not sure what exactly ensures the client can not end up with somebody else's connection in an unclean state. -- Stas Malyshev smalyshev@gmail.com