Re: Is this a dream?

> > 3. If the source code they use has proprietary Zend source in it, they are > > in violation of various copyright laws etc... > > Doesn't look like any violations. Writing ANY extensions to the PHP stuff now > requires at least referencing 'zend' stuff. Nothing I've seen in the code > seems to violate any copyrights. I think the statement about 'using zend > source code' was a misstatement. Oh, okay. Our guys will probably look it over just to be sure when we're a little less busy. > > 5. The Zend Cache will have the Optimizer builtin, I think... At any > > rate, the code isn't compiled so much as it's just kept in RAM -- "compile" > > tends to mean "create an executable binary file", which this RAM cache > > doesn't do. > > Apparently the zend cache wouldn't do this either tho - Zend itself > already compiles/creates an executable binary 'object'. It's just not written > to a file, AFAICT. It's not only not written to a file, it's not in a reloadable state to be written to a file -- memory addresses and suchlike are in there that you couldn't just dump it out to a binary file and read it back in later and expect it to work. Even for keeping it around in RAM in the cache, there's bound to be some sort of cleanup involved, I should think... I've reviewed some recent internal emails, and I think the Optimizer is at least being considered being builtin to the Cache and Encoder -- Exactly how/where/when, I'm not sure. But pulling in the optimizer code after parsing and before making it storable should not be that hard, I would think. > > 7. I'm not sure what they did to mess up include files -- The Zend products > > don't have this problem, because the include()s are done on-demand. Include > > files are cached independently by the Zend Cache, and maintained as separate > > files by the Zend Encoder. > > > > Something that's not been mentioned or discussed at all re: zend cache is memory > usage. > Does it keep a completely separate shared memory area, or are scripts cached > in each Apache child process? 2nd approach might lead to larger memory > requirements > than would otherwise be necessary. Any info on this? The Zend Cache memory requirements are very modest and scalable -- You will not need a buttload of memory just because you run 200+ Apache child processes. You will, of course, need a little more memory if you have a *lot* of PHP scripts that get used equally frequently. But we're probably talking on the order of 10 Meg or so, for a large ISP with lots of virtual hosts... Don't quote me on that 10 Meg, but it won't be like 200 Meg or anything ridiculous like that either. Could be only a couple meg for most ISPs, actually, but I don't want to get tied down to that low a number. The RAM you dedicate to it is configurable, so you'll need to play with it a bit to really get the most out of it. Reporting data for what's getting cached and what's not will also be a feature -- So you'll be able to decided if you aren't giving it enough RAM pretty easily.