Re: parallell execution

Manuel Lemos wrote: > > Hello Stig, > > On 29-Aug-00 10:08:27, you wrote: > > >In Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 02:09:30PM +0200, Stig S. Bakken wrote: > >> I want this to implement "backgrounded" asynchronous I/O, which I guess > >> is more or less what you need it for as well? > > >Well yes, sort of. We would need asynchronous variants of the different > >functions. For instance if I want to do LDAP in the background, we would > >need to have asynchronous LDAP functions. It would be neat to have a > >more general mechanism. Of course if we made an asynchronous version of > >fopen, I could launch new PHP interpreters through the webserver instead, > >and have several PHP scripts run in parallell. > > >Well, I'll have a look at ticks and do some more thinking on how to > >use it. > > I heard that Perl has (will have?) a pool of interpreters read to run > scripts in the Apache 2 multi-threaded environment. This means that for > each Apache process there will be spare interpreters ready to run scripts > threads. > > Anyway, I think that the lack of support to start new script > processes/threads is one of the remaining things that PHP lacks and in some > cases makes it an inferior solution when compared to Perl and Java > servlets. I agree. Tcl has a beautifully clean C interface in that respect (at least it did back in the 7.3 days when I last touched it :-). It doesn't sound like this is too far away for PHP. We already support(?) multithreaded servers, so it's already possible to have several scripting engines running in a single process. However, usually when I assume things like this, Zeev or Andi can point out why this makes hell break loose. :-) - Stig