Re: always building executable
| From: | Stig S. Bakken | Date: | Fri, 19 Oct 2001 05:41:50 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: always building executable | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Groups: | php.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-dev+get-68291@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Have you measured the performance impact? This should be a "solvable"
problem, and if it takes a while to find a nice solution, we could just
disable signal handling by default but leave the rest of pcntl enabled
by default?
IMHO using ticks isn't a very good solution (it's basically another hack
on top of an old hack :-) because you'd have to wrap "signal-enabled"
code in a declare section, and you wouldn't be able to use ticks for
anything else.
- Stig
Jason Greene wrote:
>
> I apologize for the late reply, my time for the last month has been consumed by
> employer issues. Things should be getting back to normal again soon. I am
> a major +1 on the cli, though I have some concerns about pcntl being enabled by
> default.
>
> Currently, my signal trapping method uses a handler that is not intended for the
> way I am using it. I use the debug statement handler, which generates a performance
> impact. (Though I have not measured it) Quite a while ago, I had discussed briefly
> with Andi, and Zeev about using a better hook. I was mainly after some form of a call
> back in the main execute loop. It was suggested that I could use ticks, but I do not think
> this is a good idea because it would make signals and ticks incompatible with each other.
>
> The signal replay code is as efficient as I could make it, so I do not think it would cause
> to much of a performance hit if it had a way into the loop. If it is undesirable, we could
> only impact the execute loop if the cli (or maybe even cgi) sapi is chosen. I could do some
> test cases if that would help. Zeev, Andi What do you think?
>
> I am up to discussion on this, so any ideas would help.
>
> Thanks,
> -Jason
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stig S. Bakken" <ssb@alltheweb.com>
> To: "Andrei Zmievski" <andrei@ispi.net>; <php-dev@lists.php.net>
> Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 7:05 PM
> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] always building executable
>
> > "Stig S. Bakken" wrote:
> > >
> > > Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, Stig S. Bakken wrote:
> > > > > If you make it a normal extension, and you don't have --enable-pcntl
> > > > > in
> > > > > your configure line, the right thing would be to include it in the cli
> > > > > version but not the apache version or whatever. So either we need a
> > > > > mechanism for conditionally including extensions in a build (ka-yuck),
> > > > > or it has to be moved.
> > > >
> > > > But what about other extensions that only make sense with cli version,
> > > > like readline?
> > >
> > > Hm, good point, there are lots of these. So basically we need another
> > > library aside libphp4.la for each sapi backend, and put the extensions
> > > in question into the right one of these.
> >
> > That was really a write-only reply. :-)
> >
> > What I mean is something like this (SAPI means selected SAPI backend):
> >
> > libphp4core.la - "core" library (main, libs, expat, regex etc)
> > libphp4ext.la - extensions in all sapi backends
> > libphp4ext_apache.la - extensions for use with sapi/apache
> > sapi/apache/libphp4.la - final Apache library
> >
> > - Stig
> >
> > --
> > PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: php-dev-unsubscribe@lists.php.net
> > For additional commands, e-mail: php-dev-help@lists.php.net
> > To contact the list administrators, e-mail: php-list-admin@lists.php.net
> >