On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 9:45 PM, Robert Cummings <rob...@interjinn.com> wrote:
> Rene Veerman wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Robert Cummings <rob...@interjinn.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Rene Veerman wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Robert Cummings <rob...@interjinn.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Rene Veerman wrote:
>>>>>> php is not a hammer, its a programming language.
>>>>> It's hard to discuss anything with someone who doesn't comprehend a
>>>>> metaphor.
>>>> haha. "comprehend". you mean "accept".
>>>> that metaphor is stretched to breaking point as far as i'm concerned.
>>>>>> one that i feel needs to stay ahead of the computing trend if it is to
>>>>>> be considered a language for large scale applications.
>>>>> Personification of PHP doesn't make your argument any more salient. PHP
>>>>> isn't trying to stay ahead of anything. People are using it to solve
>>>>> problems, not to meet some phantom ideal of a "computing trend"
>>>>> threshold.
>>>>>> but you nay-sayers here have convinced me; i'll be shopping for
>>>>>> another language with which to serve my applications and the weboutput
>>>>>> they produce..
>>>>>> thanks for opening my eyes and telling to abandon ship in time.
>>>>> Obviously we didn't open your eyes.
>>>> Well excuse me for not dumping 50-100k lines of my own cms code
>>>> instantly now that i realize that in order to scale it, i could really
>>>> use features like threading and shared memory.
>>> Actually, you are th eone suggesting dumping your code since you said you
>>> were jumping ship. Many of us suggested that your problems can almost
>>> certainly be mitigated without threading.
>> "almost certainly". at least you're acknowledging that you might be wrong.
> I'm certianly not right all the time. once I thought I was but I was wrong.
>> take this example, sorry for the crosspost;
>> my main concern atm is my own cms (50-100k lines of my own); it's
>> graphics-heavy, does fairly complicated db based logic, and if it ever
>> is to be used for a site like facebook, it'll get large dataflows that
>> have to be distributed over the servers used to generate html and
>> accessoiries for end-users.
>> i've built a layer into it that caches the output of oft-used pages
>> (like articles and their comments).
>> but adding many comments / minute to an article would result in quite
>> a bit of overhead, to update the html for that page and distribute it
>> (fast enough) to the relevant servers.
>> i'm worried about php's single-threaded nature; each request has to
>> fetch html updated in the last few seconds, or generate it from a list
>> of comments. that's also a big query from a big table for every
>> end-user.. :(
>> i'd rather keep them comments for an article in shared memory.....
> I think you'll find when you get even close to the size of facebook,
> everything you think you know now about how it all stays running will be
> thrown out the window. But then, I'm not a fan of early optimization of this
> magnitude. A good design is usually flexible enough to allow redesign
> without recoding everything. Baby steps to the moon IMHO.
yea, well, if i'm going to keep using php i need a path towards
scalability, for this particular problem.

i'd like to code the kinds of applications with big dataflows.
call me a golddigger all you want, it's what i am ;)
just not in the sexual sense hehe..

>Your tools are up to date. Threading is in the future if at all... it's 
>certainly not in the present.

True, lets _keep_ 'm up-to-date, please.

And you'd enable other uses of PHP besides helping this
real-time-web-scalability problem.

PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to