All "fpm" workers would be called using the same function name (e.g. "runphp"). This allows you to reuse a gearmand instance for other workers too.
The advantages of fpm vs gearman would be mostly performance (it uses ping and requires an underlying layer on top of tcp/ip), followed by dynamic spawning and "crash recovery". Think there are more but I can't access the website from over here ;) On 6/10/10, Brian Moon <br...@moonspot.net> wrote: > The big difference is that different processes do different jobs in > Gearman. All PHP workers in fpm just run what ever code is handed to > them. How do you handle that? > > > Brian. > -------- > http://brian.moonspot.net/ > > On 6/10/10 9:56 AM, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: >> Has anybody thought about adding Gearman support to the fpm sapi? >> Managing Gearman workers is pretty much identical to managing fastcgi >> workers, so it doesn't seem like much of a stretch. >> >> -Rasmus >> > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- -- Tjerk -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
