: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 3:48 PM
To: Zeev Suraski
Cc: PHP internals
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP
distribution
hi Zeev,
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
Any news on this front?
It's becoming harder and harder
hi Zeev,
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
Any news on this front?
It's becoming harder and harder to consider it in 5.5 if we have to
wait longer. There are enough volunteers to help, open it now :)
Cheers,
Pierre
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP
distribution
hi Zeev,
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
Any news on this front?
It's becoming harder and harder to consider it in 5.5 if we have to wait
longer.
There are enough volunteers
Following the discussion at the end of last week, I prepared a draft RFC
for the inclusion of Optimizer+ in PHP.
In parallel we’re in the process of prepping the source code for
independent public consumption, which I hope we can be done with by the end
of next week, hopefully sooner.
On 29/01/13 08:03, Zeev Suraski wrote:
Following the discussion at the end of last week, I prepared a draft RFC
for the inclusion of Optimizer+ in PHP.
In parallel we’re in the process of prepping the source code for
independent public consumption, which I hope we can be done with by the end
of
- Ursprüngliche Message -
Von: Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com
An: hakre hanskren...@yahoo.de
CC: internals@lists.php.net
Gesendet: 15:31 Dienstag, 5.Februar 2013
Betreff: RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP
distribution
Based on an 18 month release
- Ursprüngliche Message -
Von: Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com
An: hakre hanskren...@yahoo.de
CC: internals@lists.php.net
Gesendet: 17:47 Mittwoch, 30.Januar 2013
Betreff: RE: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP
distribution
* In that RFC you write
Based on an 18 month release cycle, and assuming we release 5.5.0 in
mid 2013, 5.6.0 will come out late 2014.
I wonder where you pick those quantifications from, according to
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/releaseprocess there is 12 month cycle/tact, and
according to the release date of PHP
5.4
Chris,
We're talking about a very specialized piece of software - an opcode cache
- nothing more, nothing less. It's not going to do anything beyond
implementing the concept of an opcode cache in php - no extra features.
Rasmus pointed out correctly that this component has nothing to do with the
On 02/01/2013 12:38 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
In terms of what integration would entail - my intent was that integration
means that it's on by default. I'll clarify that in the RFC, unless people
think we should put that up for discussion..?
The hardest thing about that is figuring out the
On 30/01/13 00:54, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
On 01/29/2013 04:47 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
which shows the dreaded zend_optimizerplus.inherited_hack which mimics
APC's autofilter hack. I'd love to get rid of this particular bit of
confusion/code complexity on the integration.
Ohh, this one.
On 01/31/2013 01:22 AM, Terry Ellison wrote:
On 30/01/13 00:54, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
On 01/29/2013 04:47 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
which shows the dreaded zend_optimizerplus.inherited_hack which mimics
APC's autofilter hack. I'd love to get rid of this particular bit of
confusion/code
On 01/30/2013 06:47 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
This is the kind of info the RFC (and then user doc) should have.
I updated the RFC with two extra sections - 'what's an opcode cache',
This section extremely general and doesn't explain what the expected
feature set might look like. I'm not
XDebug together with an opcode cache is always a shaky thing and not
something we should be too concerned about. You would never want to
run both in production. It would be good if they didn't clobber each
other for dev environment purposes, but I am sure we can figure that
out.
This
Hi
2013/1/30 Stas Malyshev smalys...@sugarcrm.com:
How it's more outside product than any of the other extensions we
brought to the core?
Because it was not developed at php.net for example? How many
extensions thats in the core today was not developed somewhere at
php.net, or was either in
This is the kind of info the RFC (and then user doc) should have.
I updated the RFC with two extra sections - 'what's an opcode cache', and
'interaction with other plugins'.
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/optimizerplus
Zeev
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe,
] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP
distribution
This is the kind of info the RFC (and then user doc) should have.
I updated the RFC with two extra sections - 'what's an opcode cache', and
'interaction with other plugins'.
https://wiki.php.net/rfc/optimizerplus
Zeev
--
PHP Internals - PHP
On 30 בינו 2013, at 16:57, John Carter jcar...@identitynetworks.com wrote:
Hi Zeev,
Specifically would it continue to work with the Zend Guard decoder (as it
does now)?
Our (Zend's) goal would be yes.
Zeev
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit:
* In that RFC you write:
the integration won’t happen before late 2014. [if it's not bundled
with PHP 5.5]
Can you please outline why?
Based on an 18 month release cycle, and assuming we release 5.5.0 in mid
2013, 5.6.0 will come out late 2014.
Especially does it mean you stop
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
* In that RFC you write:
the integration won’t happen before late 2014. [if it's not bundled
with PHP 5.5]
Can you please outline why?
Based on an 18 month release cycle, and assuming we release 5.5.0 in mid
2013,
-Original Message-
From: Pierre Joye [mailto:pierre@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 7:22 PM
To: Zeev Suraski
Cc: hakre; PHP internals
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP
distribution
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Zeev Suraski z
Hi!
Because it was not developed at php.net for example? How many
I'm not sure what is the meaning here. Nothing is developed at
php.net, strictly speaking. php.net doesn't have its own development
team that works exclusively for php.net, it just gets code contributions
from volunteers. And
hi Zeev!
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
All,
Following the discussion at the end of last week, I prepared a draft RFC
for the inclusion of Optimizer+ in PHP.
In parallel we’re in the process of prepping the source code for
independent public
Zeev Suraski wrote:
Following the discussion at the end of last week, I prepared a draft RFC
for the inclusion of Optimizer+ in PHP.
Hey Zeev,
I see in the Benchmarks you tested with WordPress 2.1.1, however this
release is roughly 5 years old. Is it possible to get an updated test
with 3.5.1
One important part missing is the actual compatibility/support of thread
safe
PHP. I know that Zend mostly care about NTS since quite some time and
that
worries me a lot to bundle something that is not working well in thread
safe
mode. I would consider that as a stopping point. I mean, not to
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
All,
Following the discussion at the end of last week, I prepared a draft RFC
for the inclusion of Optimizer+ in PHP.
In parallel we’re in the process of prepping the source code for
independent public consumption, which I
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
One important part missing is the actual compatibility/support of thread
safe
PHP. I know that Zend mostly care about NTS since quite some time and
that
worries me a lot to bundle something that is not working well in thread
-Original Message-
From: Ryan McCue [mailto:li...@rotorised.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 10:13 AM
To: Zeev Suraski
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP
distribution
Zeev Suraski wrote:
Following the discussion
On 29/01/13 09:30, Zeev Suraski wrote:
[snip]
(My guess is that it will show WP being slower and with a more dramatic
improvement.)
By the way, I just realized the % gain wasn't all that self-explanatory -
it's vs. APC, not vs. plain PHP. I improved the doc to reflect both gains
vs. plain PHP
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa
ivan.ender...@hoa-project.net wrote:
On 29/01/13 09:30, Zeev Suraski wrote:
[snip]
(My guess is that it will show WP being slower and with a more dramatic
improvement.)
By the way, I just realized the % gain wasn't all that
On 2013/1/29 16:38, Laruence wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa
ivan.ender...@hoa-project.net wrote:
On 29/01/13 09:30, Zeev Suraski wrote:
[snip]
(My guess is that it will show WP being slower and with a more dramatic
improvement.)
By the way, I just realized the %
On 01/29/2013 10:47 AM, Martin Keckeis wrote:
From the perspective of the end-user this would be really great!
If it could really be done in 2 months - wait for it.
Why should we break the PHP release process by 2 months+ to include O+ ?
There are alternatives (APC to name one) and O+ might
Thank you for this great initiative!
As a user, I could definitely wait for 2-3 more months and get
a good implementation/integration of this rather that have to
wait for at least one year.
I think it would also be nice if this could come as default
enabled since this way people would be able to
This is really exciting!
As a user, I say allow a delay to get this into 5.5. I was kind of disappointed
that some cache wasn't bundled with 5.4. It's been too long that this very
important piece has been separate from the core.
Cheers
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
Zeev,
First off, very nice job on the RFC. I definitely like what's happening
here.
As far as delaying 5.5, I have mixed feelings. I think we should definitely
consider the delay, but only in a time-boxed format. So if we say 1
month, then if it's not ready to be committed in that month, it
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Florin Razvan Patan florinpa...@gmail.com
wrote:
Thank you for this great initiative!
As a user, I could definitely wait for 2-3 more months and get
a good implementation/integration of this rather that have to
wait for at least one year.
I think it would
On 29 January 2013 11:23, Anthony Ferrara ircmax...@gmail.com wrote:
Zeev,
First off, very nice job on the RFC. I definitely like what's happening
here.
As far as delaying 5.5, I have mixed feelings. I think we should definitely
consider the delay, but only in a time-boxed format. So if we
Hi Zeev
2013/1/29 Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com:
In parallel we’re in the process of prepping the source code for
independent public consumption, which I hope we can be done with by the end
of next week, hopefully sooner.
I'm sorry, but I don't see why we out of a sudden should consider
adding a
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Kalle Sommer Nielsen ka...@php.net wrote:
Hi Zeev
2013/1/29 Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com:
In parallel we’re in the process of prepping the source code for
independent public consumption, which I hope we can be done with by the end
of next week, hopefully
On 1/29/2013 5:23 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
Additionally, I don't like the precedent that this sets for future
releases. That it's ok to break the timebox for some feature. In this case
I think we can justify it, but future cases may use this to justify waiting
when it's not completely
-Original Message-
From: kalle@gmail.com [mailto:kalle@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Kalle
Sommer Nielsen
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 3:28 PM
To: Zeev Suraski
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP
distribution
Hi
Hi Pierre
2013/1/29 Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com:
It is not done yet. But given that the code is clean and easily
maintainable, it could be much more efficient for us to focus on one
extension and make it rock instead of trying to get each of them work
well. As Rasmus stated, between the
2013/1/29 Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com:
The RFC explains the pros and cons of doing that, I don't really have any
additional reasons to add beyond what I already put there. I believe the
pros outweigh the cons by a good considerable margin, but that's what the
vote would be about. Perhaps the
-Original Message-
From: Clint Priest [mailto:cpri...@zerocue.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 3:30 PM
To: Anthony Ferrara
Cc: Tyler Sommer; Zeev Suraski; internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP
distribution
On 1/29/2013 5
On 01/29/2013 05:30 AM, Clint Priest wrote:
2) Isn't APC the standard? Is it in such bad shape it is not even being
considered any longer?
As it currently stands from a developer participation standpoint it is
not viable. I outlined the issues in a previous post.
You also have to take into
-Original Message-
From: kalle@gmail.com [mailto:kalle@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Kalle
Sommer Nielsen
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 3:45 PM
To: Zeev Suraski
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP
distribution
2013
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 01/29/2013 05:30 AM, Clint Priest wrote:
2) Isn't APC the standard? Is it in such bad shape it is not even being
considered any longer?
As it currently stands from a developer participation standpoint it is
not
On 01/29/2013 06:13 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
I'm not sure I fully understand this. The RFC claims that Optimizer+ is
already *now* fully compatible with PHP 5.5. And that it was also
compatible when PHP 5.4 was released. So they lack of a working and free
opcode cache clearly wasn't the issue.
2013/1/29 Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com:
I'd would of course prefer that we evaluate the proposal based on the
substance and not on other factors, but that said, I fully respect your
position and wouldn't hold it against you if you vote 'no'...
My vote will ofcourse also take the RFC into
Hi Zeev,
Am 29.01.2013 um 15:21 schrieb Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com:
On 01/29/2013 06:13 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
I'm not sure I fully understand this. The RFC claims that Optimizer+ is
already *now* fully compatible with PHP 5.5. And that it was also
compatible when PHP 5.4 was
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf ras...@lerdorf.com wrote:
On 01/29/2013 06:13 AM, Nikita Popov wrote:
I'm not sure I fully understand this. The RFC claims that Optimizer+ is
already *now* fully compatible with PHP 5.5. And that it was also
compatible when PHP 5.4 was
Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
2013/1/29 Zeev Suraskiz...@zend.com:
The RFC explains the pros and cons of doing that, I don't really have any
additional reasons to add beyond what I already put there. I believe the
pros outweigh the cons by a good considerable margin, but that's what the
vote
2013/1/29 Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk:
I'll get my head chewed off again, but can we no consider doing that as PHP6
given that 6.0.x could be a development stage. I would perhaps then strongly
lobby for 'only' having E_STRICT mode so things like 'static $this' go by
the by anyway? This
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Zeev Suraski wrote:
From: Clint Priest [mailto:cpri...@zerocue.com]:
On 1/29/2013 5:23 AM, Anthony Ferrara wrote:
Additionally, I don't like the precedent that this sets for future
releases. That it's ok to break the timebox for some feature. In
this case I
Am 29.1.2013 um 15:58 schrieb Derick Rethans der...@php.net:
I wouldn't bother making it work with ZTS. If you want performance, you
shouldn't be using it, and the other case I heard was pthreads in
which case it plays no role,as all of the script is in memory anyway
for the duration of
Kalle Sommer Nielsen wrote:
2013/1/29 Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk:
I'll get my head chewed off again, but can we no consider doing that as PHP6
given that 6.0.x could be a development stage. I would perhaps then strongly
lobby for 'only' having E_STRICT mode so things like 'static $this' go
-Original Message-
From: Lars Strojny [mailto:l...@strojny.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 4:33 PM
To: Rasmus Lerdorf
Cc: Nikita Popov; internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Integrating Zend Optimizer+ into the PHP
distribution
To get more practical, I see
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Zeev Suraski wrote:
Following the discussion at the end of last week, I prepared a draft
RFC for the inclusion of Optimizer+ in PHP.
In parallel we’re in the process of prepping the source code for
independent public consumption, which I hope we can be done with by
Am 29.01.2013 16:54, schrieb Derick Rethans:
I like it. It would be totally awesome if it came with a webinar or
something where Dmitry/Stas explain how it works though. Understanding
how APC works has always been a contentious point. I'd be awesome if we
could turn that around with O+?
I
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Bob Weinand wrote:
Am 29.1.2013 um 15:58 schrieb Derick Rethans der...@php.net:
I wouldn't bother making it work with ZTS. If you want performance,
you shouldn't be using it, and the other case I heard was pthreads
in which case it plays no role,as all of the
On 29 בינו 2013, at 17:54, Derick Rethans der...@php.net wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Zeev Suraski wrote:
Following the discussion at the end of last week, I prepared a draft
RFC for the inclusion of Optimizer+ in PHP.
In parallel we’re in the process of prepping the source code for
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
On 29 בינו 2013, at 17:54, Derick Rethans der...@php.net wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Zeev Suraski wrote:
Following the discussion at the end of last week, I prepared a draft
RFC for the inclusion of Optimizer+ in PHP.
In
Sent from my iPhone 6 Beta [Confidential use only]
On 29 jan. 2013, at 18:02, Pierre Joye pierre@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Zeev Suraski z...@zend.com wrote:
On 29 בינו 2013, at 17:54, Derick Rethans der...@php.net wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Zeev Suraski wrote:
On 1/29/13 3:47 AM, Martin Keckeis wrote:
From the perspective of the end-user this would be really great!
If it could really be done in 2 months - wait for it.
best regards.
Considering the importance of opcode caches to any serious project these
days, I'd say a 2 month delay to get an
On 01/29/2013 12:30 AM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
By the way, I just realized the % gain wasn't all that self-explanatory -
it's vs. APC, not vs. plain PHP. I improved the doc to reflect both gains
vs. plain PHP and vs. APC.
Thanks for the feedback!
Zeev
Zeev,
It would be useful to link to
On 01/29/2013 04:17 PM, Christopher Jones wrote:
It would be useful to link to the current Optimizer+ doc from the RFC.
I believe the link is
http://static.zend.com/topics/Zend-Optimizer-User-Guide-v330-new.pdf
Different beast. Something like this is more apt:
Hi!
I don't doubt any of your abilities, what I do doubt is that how we
can consider an outside project directly into the core. APC would
How it's more outside product than any of the other extensions we
brought to the core?
without a doubt be up to pair if there was more people willingly to
Hi!
I like it. It would be totally awesome if it came with a webinar or
something where Dmitry/Stas explain how it works though. Understanding
how APC works has always been a contentious point. I'd be awesome if we
could turn that around with O+?
Once the code is out there, I think it's
Hi!
which shows the dreaded zend_optimizerplus.inherited_hack which mimics
APC's autofilter hack. I'd love to get rid of this particular bit of
confusion/code complexity on the integration.
Ohh, this one. IIRC that has to do with conditional definition of
classes and the fact that script may
On 01/29/2013 04:47 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
which shows the dreaded zend_optimizerplus.inherited_hack which mimics
APC's autofilter hack. I'd love to get rid of this particular bit of
confusion/code complexity on the integration.
Ohh, this one. IIRC that has to do with conditional
On 01/29/2013 04:27 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
On 01/29/2013 04:17 PM, Christopher Jones wrote:
It would be useful to link to the current Optimizer+ doc from the RFC.
I believe the link is
http://static.zend.com/topics/Zend-Optimizer-User-Guide-v330-new.pdf
Different beast. Something like
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Christopher Jones
christopher.jo...@oracle.com wrote:
The RFC still mentions Pierre helping with ZTS, which I believe is a
left-over comment??
No, it is on purpose and a pro for those worrying about ZTS.
Cheers,
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye
--
PHP Internals - PHP
72 matches
Mail list logo
