Re: Will PHP ever "grow up" and have threading?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 22:05 +0200, Rene Veerman wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 9:54 PM, Ashley Sheridan
> <ash@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> 
> >   On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 21:50 +0200, Rene Veerman wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 9:45 PM, Robert Cummings <robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Rene Veerman wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Robert Cummings <robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Rene Veerman wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Robert Cummings <robert@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>>> 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.
> >
> >
> >
> > Why don't you set up a vote to see how many developers actually *want*
> > threading. That would be a good indication of whether or not it is actually
> > worth the PHP development team spending a lot of time on it at the loss of
> > other features which people want more.
> >
> 
> we'd probably lose that vote because so many of you other php programmers
> refuse to see that we do have good uses for it, and you don't. yet.
> 
> but ultimately it's a matter of the php dev's team time and effort, so when
> this thread has run it's course i may go to the internals list and raise it
> -diplomatically- there.


So you're basically saying that you'd discount anyone who opposes you
purely because you think you know best?

Nice attitude.

Thanks,
Ash
http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk



[Index of Archives]     [PHP Home]     [Apache Users]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Install]     [PHP Classes]     [Pear]     [Postgresql]     [Postgresql PHP]     [PHP on Windows]     [PHP Database Programming]     [PHP SOAP]

  Powered by Linux