On Sun, Sep 10, 2023 at 7:06 PM Tim Düsterhus <t...@bastelstu.be> wrote:
> Hi > > On 9/8/23 18:49, Alexandru Pătrănescu wrote: > > > > I think 12 looks reasonable. > > I've performed some tests myself on private hosted servers with > > newer hardware with good results for 12 around 0.1 seconds. > > wow, that is a 33% reduction even compared to the Xeon E-2246G and thus > hard to believe. What CPU is that? > > That was a new Xeon Gold 5416S. I got lucky being able to run some tests on it before being pushed to production replacing a slightly older one, a Xeon Gold 5218. I'll be able to test that as well, but I feel like anyway the hardware I used is not what is usually in general. Actually, it is even less relevant, as it is meant to be used by a high performing MySQL server and not for running PHP. > > Pushing it to 8.4 will delay the real usage with 2-3 more years already. > > IMO this is fine. Common frameworks can and do already use a different > default. Symfony apparently is at 13 by default. Laravel uses 10, but > I've already pinged someone on Mastodon to maybe have a look at the > results of this RFC: > > https://phpc.social/@timwolla/111025125667858110 > > The current default of 10 is not insecure and rolling this out a little > more slowly will mean that more and more of the old and slow hardware > will be retired and replaced by modern hardware, lessening the impact. > > Understood, yes, I agree. > > I feel like the hardware performance improvements (specifically single > > thread performance) slightly increased in the past 3-4 years, and soon > most > > of the hosting providers will be using it. > > > > From my experience as a developer of a software that is commonly run on > shared hosting, web hosters *love* their ancient hardware, because it's > fully depreciated from a taxation / accounting PoV and every extra day > it is used is "free money". Customers commonly are not able to tell they > are running with tens of other customers on this ancient hardware and > thus won't complain ("loading times of 1 second are fine"). > > Yes, I think I evaluated the hardware upgrade lifecycle to be around 5 years, but in reality it's 10-15 years. And also the CPU options used by hosting providers are cost oriented, to get the most performance per dollar. Thank you, Alex
