On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Andi Gutmans wrote: > It wouldn't hurt anyone and it *is* a pressing problem from talks I've had > with all sorts of ppl that have high traffic machines.
You must be talking to different people than I am.
We are :)
100 or so functions all sitting in shared pages and thus shared across each httpd is a trivial amount of memory. I suspect these people who are having problems don't know how to optimize their httpd very well. You get a lot more bang for the buck from making each request process faster and lowering the number of httpd children you need to run. System-call optimization and overall optimization of the various critical sections would give you a lot more return on your effort than disabling a few functions. I would be very surprised if you were to comment out 100 functions somewhere, that you could even measure a performance difference on a high-traffic site.
I think it very much depends on how many such entries we find that make sense to disable. From Andi's list, I'd say that only the image extension sounds as if it may give us some noticeable gain. I don't think this has anything to do with overall optimization. That particular thing is trivial to perform, optimization isn't, so in terms of return-on-investment, it's likely to be better. But overall, again, it very much depends if we there's a significant chunk in PHP that can be disabled without breaking the average application.
Personally, I'm not convinced this is that case, even if the people we're dealing with run thousands of Apache processes per server (which they do).
Zeev
-- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
