I am testing O+ on Windows with php 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5.
I have uploaded my O+ test results here: http://windows.php.net/downloads/snaps/ostc/pftt/
Crashes have increased with 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5 TS builds with Apache. TS or NTS on CLI seem fine.
See http://windows.php.net/downloads/snaps/ostc/pftt/PHP_5_3/r61099f8/PHPT_CMP_PHP_5_3-r61099f8-TS-X86-VC9_Local-FileSystem_Apache-ModPHP_v_PHP_5_3-r61099f8-TS-X86-VC9_OptimizerPlus_Local-FileSystem_Apache-ModPHP.html and http://windows.php.net/downloads/snaps/ostc/pftt/PHP_5_4/r7c08232/PHPT_CMP_PHP_5_4-r7c08232-TS-X86-VC9_Local-FileSystem_Apache-ModPHP_v_PHP_5_4-r7c08232-TS-X86-VC9_OptimizerPlus_Local-FileSystem_Apache-ModPHP.html and http://windows.php.net/downloads/snaps/ostc/pftt/PHP_5_4/r7c08232/PHPT_CMP_PHP_5_4-r7c08232-TS-X86-VC9_Local-FileSystem_CLI_v_PHP_5_4-r7c08232-TS-X86-VC9_OptimizerPlus_Local-FileSystem_CLI.html
Crashes are up to 6 or 7 (in addition to the same 2 or 3) on 5.3 and 5.4. And with 5.5, crashes are up to 17 on CLI and 22 on Apache. 5.5 is compiled using VC11 whereas 5.4 and 5.3 are compiled using VC9 so that may be part of the issue with 5.5.
See http://windows.php.net/downloads/snaps/ostc/pftt/PHP_5_5/r0d65a85/PHPT_CMP_PHP_5_5-r0d65a85-TS-X86-VC11_Local-FileSystem_Apache-ModPHP_v_PHP_5_5-r0d65a85-TS-X86-VC11_OptimizerPlus_Local-FileSystem_Apache-ModPHP.html and http://windows.php.net/downloads/snaps/ostc/pftt/PHP_5_5/r0d65a85/PHPT_CMP_PHP_5_5-r0d65a85-TS-X86-VC11_Local-FileSystem_CLI_v_PHP_5_5-r0d65a85-TS-X86-VC11_OptimizerPlus_Local-FileSystem_CLI.html
Secondly, Reflection may be affected when running on Apache. PhpUnit uses reflection to run the actual test method. On Apache, all tests pass with O+ whereas on CLI or Apache without O+, I get ~38 errors and failures and some crashes (validated): Reflection seems broken only on Apache only with O+.
See http://windows.php.net/downloads/snaps/ostc/pftt/PHP_5_5/r0d65a85/PhpUnit_CMP_Symfony-Standard-2.1.8_PHP_5_5-r0d65a85-TS-X86-VC11_Local-FileSystem_Apache-ModPHP_v_PHP_5_5-r0d65a85-TS-X86-VC11_OptimizerPlus_Local-FileSystem_Apache-ModPHP.html and http://windows.php.net/downloads/snaps/ostc/pftt/PHP_5_5/r0d65a85/PhpUnit_CMP_Symfony-Standard-2.1.8_PHP_5_5-r0d65a85-TS-X86-VC11_Local-FileSystem_CLI_v_PHP_5_5-r0d65a85-TS-X86-VC11_OptimizerPlus_Local-FileSystem_CLI.html
PhpUnit uses ReflectionMethod::invokeArgs to actually invoke the test method to run the test, and if no exceptions are thrown, it assumes the test passes. I think at least some of the test methods aren't getting invoked (optimized out?) but no exception is thrown, so PhpUnit assumes the test passes.
I am still studying this Reflection issue. I will try to create a PHPT test for this reflection+O+ issue.
Regards
-M
I am testing O+ on Windows with php 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5.
I have uploaded my O+ test results here: http://windows.php.net/downloads/snaps/ostc/pftt/
Can you put your O+ php.ini settings up there as well?
Did you experiment with any options?
Putting the date of your O+ snapshot would also be handy.
Chris
--
christopher.jones@oracle.com http://twitter.com/ghrd
Newly updated, free PHP & Oracle book:
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/php/underground-php-oracle-manual-098250.html
On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Christopher Jones
christopher.jones@oracle.com wrote:
Can you put your O+ php.ini settings up there as well?
All default, especially for symfony tests, which must have the comment
setting enabled (while some tests still fail even if the settings are
enabled).
Did you experiment with any options?
Putting the date of your O+ snapshot would also be handy.
Latest from here are used:
http://windows.php.net/downloads/pecl/snaps/Optimizer/7.0.0-dev/
Dates are included. It would be nice to have it in the report as well,
but we always use latest revision. It would however be much easier if
there were PECL releases.
Cheers,
Pierre
@pierrejoye
Did you experiment with any options?
Putting the date of your O+ snapshot would also be handy.Latest from here are used:
http://windows.php.net/downloads/pecl/snaps/Optimizer/7.0.0-dev/Dates are included. It would be nice to have it in the report as well,
but we always use latest revision. It would however be much easier if
there were PECL releases.
+1
Dmitry, is there any objection against creating a pecl release?
Could you tag the first version?
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
-----Original Message-----
From: Ferenc Kovacs [mailto:tyra3l@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2013 10:15 AM
To: Pierre Joye; Dmitry Stogov
Cc: Christopher Jones; Matt Ficken; internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Current Status of O+ on WindowsDid you experiment with any options?
Putting the date of your O+ snapshot would also be handy.Latest from here are used:
http://windows.php.net/downloads/pecl/snaps/Optimizer/7.0.0-dev/Dates are included. It would be nice to have it in the report as well,
but we always use latest revision. It would however be much easier if
there were PECL releases.+1
Dmitry, is there any objection against creating a pecl release?
Could you tag the first version?
The current vote that's going on right now deals with putting the extension
into PHP itself. If that happens (which seems awfully likely at this
point), why do we need it in PECL? We'd very much rather invest our very
limited cycles into the code itself. We're probably roughly a week away
from having builds as a part of the PHP 5.5 snaps.
Zeev
-----Original Message-----
From: Ferenc Kovacs [mailto:tyra3l@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2013 10:15 AM
To: Pierre Joye; Dmitry Stogov
Cc: Christopher Jones; Matt Ficken; internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Current Status of O+ on WindowsDid you experiment with any options?
Putting the date of your O+ snapshot would also be handy.Latest from here are used:
http://windows.php.net/downloads/pecl/snaps/Optimizer/7.0.0-dev/Dates are included. It would be nice to have it in the report as well,
but we always use latest revision. It would however be much easier if
there were PECL releases.+1
Dmitry, is there any objection against creating a pecl release?
Could you tag the first version?The current vote that's going on right now deals with putting the extension
into PHP itself. If that happens (which seems awfully likely at this
point), why do we need it in PECL? We'd very much rather invest our very
limited cycles into the code itself. We're probably roughly a week away
from having builds as a part of the PHP 5.5 snaps.Zeev
I see.
so no O+ for <5.5?
having a pecl release would be a small amount of work, which I would glad
to help with.
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
+1 s, Switch to a new opcode cacher is much easier than update PHP,
and ZO+ is already compatible with <5.5. we could use ZO+ as soon as possible.
reeze | reeze.cn
已使用 Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig)
在 2013年3月2日星期六,下午4:43,Ferenc Kovacs 写道:
-----Original Message-----
From: Ferenc Kovacs [mailto:tyra3l@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2013 10:15 AM
To: Pierre Joye; Dmitry Stogov
Cc: Christopher Jones; Matt Ficken; internals@lists.php.net (mailto:internals@lists.php.net)
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Current Status of O+ on WindowsDid you experiment with any options?
Putting the date of your O+ snapshot would also be handy.Latest from here are used:
http://windows.php.net/downloads/pecl/snaps/Optimizer/7.0.0-dev/Dates are included. It would be nice to have it in the report as well,
but we always use latest revision. It would however be much easier if
there were PECL releases.+1
Dmitry, is there any objection against creating a pecl release?
Could you tag the first version?The current vote that's going on right now deals with putting the extension
into PHP itself. If that happens (which seems awfully likely at this
point), why do we need it in PECL? We'd very much rather invest our very
limited cycles into the code itself. We're probably roughly a week away
from having builds as a part of the PHP 5.5 snaps.Zeev
I see.
so no O+ for <5.5?
having a pecl release would be a small amount of work, which I would glad
to help with.--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
The current vote that's going on right now deals with putting the extension
into PHP itself. If that happens (which seems awfully likely at this
point), why do we need it in PECL?
My response to your Q is that there is probably going to be quite a lot
of interest in an O+ package that is usable with PHP 5.3 and 5.4.
Surely a PECL package will have a quicker uptake terms of getting it out
into the wider PHP developers community and into production, especially
if the main Linux distros add a precompiled php5-optimizer-plus package
(or whatever their naming convention is).
Would you see such O+ support for the existing supported versions best
done through the PECL route or swept up into a maintenance dot release?
Regards Terry