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

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

 



On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:19 PM, Ashley Sheridan
<ash@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

>  On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 22:15 +0200, Rene Veerman wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Ashley Sheridan
> <ash@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > So you're basically saying that you'd discount anyone who opposes you
> > purely because you think you know best?
> >
> > Nice attitude.
> >
>
> I ain't saying that at all, nor did i intend to imply it.
>
> In fact it's the anti-threading/shared-mem camp that thinks they know
> everything best with their instistance that "throw more hardware at it, more
> sql servers, more programming languages in a single project" will solve all
> software design / growth problems with enough efficiency.
>
> They're offering the alternative. You keep disagreeing with their viewpoint
> because you seem to think you know best on this matter and won't even
> concede on a point.
>


they're offering an alternative that would not solve the use-case i could
think of within 1 day..

and they also say 'add more hardware' which means more overhead of every
kind, resulting in wasteful business practices.

>  In this case, you still haven't given me any other reason to oppose the
> evolution of php with the market trend
>
> Do you have any proof of this 'market trend'? I suggested a vote, but you
> 'nay-sayed' it on the basis that you'd lose to people who couldn't possibly
> know as much as you do.
>


yes, twitter. facebook. the fact that a graphics upgrade would likely
increase business for the first ones on that popularity level to implement
it.
that's the proof i have for the market trend.

oh, and the fact "cloud computing" is becoming more and more of a buzzword
in the industry.



>
> I wouldn't say I belonged to any particular camp at the start of this
> thread, but now, having read what my betters have said, I'm inclined to
> agree that threading isn't the magic wand that you seem to think it is. I
> personally see one of the largest sites in the world running on PHP without
> needing threading and without insulting half the list to attempt to get it.
>
>
 you haven't offered me any description at all of how i'd solve the
large-scale realtime-web-app with existing techniques.

and if i explain why i'd need the features we've discussed, you dismiss it
by accepting a generalized "that can be solved with more sql servers" answer
that is admitted to increase costs in every department, including energy
consumption. on a non-linear scale btw.

[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