On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:47 AM, Per Jessen <p...@computer.org> wrote: > Rene Veerman wrote: > >> popular : facebook youtube etc >> > > Rene, I must be missing something here. That sort of size implies > millions in advertising revenue, so why are we discussing how much > performance we can squeeze out of a single box? I mean, I'm all for > efficient use of system resources, but if I have a semi-scalable > application, it's a lot easier just getting another box than trying to > change the implementation language. OTOH, if my design is not > scalable, it's probably also easier to redo it than trying to change > the implementation language.
again: a) you're determining the contents of my toolset, without it affecting you at all. the way you want it php will degrade into a toy language. b) i will aim for all possible decreases in development time and operating costs during, not only in the grow phase but also in hard economic times. any business person knows why. > >> and you're still trying to impose a toolset on me. > > I didn't think I was - you're the one who seem to be fixed on PHP as the > only solution, and advocating that it be enhanced to suit your > purposes. no, php is just my toolset of choice, and i think it should grow with the times and support threading and shared memory. maybe even a few cool features to enable use-as-a-cloud. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
