Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:85489
Return-Path: <francois@php.net>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 13403 invoked from network); 27 Mar 2015 00:32:23 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 27 Mar 2015 00:32:23 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=francois@php.net; sender-id=unknown
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=francois@php.net; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown
Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 212.27.42.2 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: francois@php.net
X-Host-Fingerprint: 212.27.42.2 smtp2-g21.free.fr  
Received: from [212.27.42.2] ([212.27.42.2:1360] helo=smtp2-g21.free.fr)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 90/47-00585-515A4155 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 19:32:22 -0500
Received: from moorea (unknown [82.240.16.115])
	by smtp2-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC73A4B0163;
	Fri, 27 Mar 2015 01:30:38 +0100 (CET)
Reply-To: <francois@php.net>
To: "'Cesar Rodas'" <cesar@rodas.me>,
	"'PHP Internals'" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <55144779.7020205@rodas.me>
In-Reply-To: <55144779.7020205@rodas.me>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 01:32:06 +0100
Message-ID: <015901d06825$75387fa0$5fa97ee0$@php.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQHzgSSs06mmfkxjDbaFaAzPRskUQ5zpQ+wA
Content-Language: fr
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 150326-1, 26/03/2015), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Subject: RE: [PHP-DEV] PHP RFC: Add is_cacheable() stream-wrapper operation
From: francois@php.net (=?utf-8?Q?Fran=C3=A7ois_Laupretre?=)

> De : Cesar Rodas [mailto:cesar@rodas.me]
>
> What is the status of https://wiki.php.net/rfc/streams-is-cacheable ?
> Will it be open for votes soon enough?
>=20
> It looks a silly change but pretty useful to some projects I have.

Is_cacheable() is based on the fact that the key to use is the path =
itself, which is too specific.

The RFC will be rewritten to propose a 'cache_key' operation, which will =
have the responsibility to return a binary string to use as a key to =
cache and retrieve the given path/uri. Among others, it will allow plain =
files to be cached using a combination of device+inode+mtime, as it was =
done in APC, instead of using the path (this will solve the issue with =
chrooted environments).

I hope I can propose the new version for 7.1.

Regards

Fran=C3=A7ois