I agree that TTL for in-memory cache is a good idea. I also think that
in-memory cache should be the only type of cache we support (why have
two types of caches really).
-Andrei
On Apr 17, 2006, at 10:48 PM, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
Hi Andrei,
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrei Zmievski [mailto:andrei@gravitonic.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 1:36 AM
To: Dmitry Stogov
Cc: 'Uwe Schindler'; 'Rasmus Lerdorf'; soap@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: Frequent crashes in multithreaded
webserver since new WSDLcaching code in ext/soap
Andrei,
I was agree with your patch only after 5.1.3 release.
And I disagree with persistent WSDL by default at all. Especially
without protection against huge memory usage.
How huge is it really? We can put TTL on in-memory cache as
well, but I
think that we should have only in-memory cache and not bother
with the
disk one anymore -- it's just too slow.
Yes, we need some mechanism for cache expiration and invalidation.
I see two big problems:
1) Now it is necessury to change PHP code to disable WSDL in-memory
cache to
reload changed WSDL. How to develop WSDL?
2) WEB hoster may have 1000 users, and how many memory will take 1000
cached
WSDL files?
3) On slow lines on-disk WSDL cache makes great speedup over direct
request.
Of course in-memory cache should operate faster.
I suggest add some configuration directive to enable/disable in-memory
cache. Or change existing ones to have disk/memory/off values.
I hadn't time to look into you patch careful, and seems it wasn't
tested
enough. I looked into it today, found and fixed another bugs in
addition to
your fix. I cannot be sure that these are latest bugs
related to this
patch.
I know you fixed those bugs. There is at least one more remaining,
according to the bug #37083. I am fine with reverting the in-memory
cache (or at least disabling the cache_wsdl) parameter until after
5.1.3.
I think we can stay code in CVS but disable it by default.
(Invert the behavior of "cache_wsdl" parameter.)
Or we can use default value frim configuration directive.
What do you think?
Also for what reason you disabled disk cache? I re-enabled it.
Because it's too slow?
I prefer not to break working code, before making better one.
Do you have any ideas about the problem described in the last few
comments in the bug?
I'll look.
Thanks. Dmitry.
-Andrei
--
PHP Soap Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
PHP Soap Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
