php-general Digest 28 Aug 2012 19:07:12 -0000 Issue 7941
Topics (messages 318898 through 318913):
Separate apc-caches for each fpm-pool
318898 by: Simon Schick
Re: [PHP-DEV] Separate apc-caches for each fpm-pool
318899 by: Simon Schick
Who is responsible for NFD or NFC formated UTF8 text? PHP, my application or
the system-administrator?
318900 by: Simon Schick
Re: include selectively or globally?
318901 by: Matijn Woudt
318908 by: David Harkness
318911 by: Adam Richardson
Re: What's the best way to make a dynamic plugin architecture?
318902 by: Matijn Woudt
Re: [modauthkerb] Cannot retrieve KRB5CCNAME if logged in with kerberos ticket
318903 by: Mauricio Tavares
318912 by: Benjamin Kahn
FoxPro Table Structure
318904 by: Floyd Resler
318905 by: Paul M Foster
318906 by: Floyd Resler
PHP to XLS Security Alert issue
318907 by: admin
MSSQL Stored Proc
318909 by: Phillip Baker
318910 by: Andrew Ballard
Re: OT (maybe not): Drupal vs WordPress
318913 by: Larry Garfield
Administrivia:
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
php-general-digest-subscr...@lists.php.net
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
php-general-digest-unsubscr...@lists.php.net
To post to the list, e-mail:
php-gene...@lists.php.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--- Begin Message ---
Hi, all
Not to get the bugfix https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=57825 too much
off-topic, I write this question in the mailinglist here:
Taking the case I have two fpm-pools on different sockets - the first
pool is responsible for www.example1.com and the second one for
www.example2.com.
If www.example1.com has 4 workers, they're all using the same
apc-cache. That's absolutely as expected. But also the workers of
www.example2.com are using this cache. In my opinion it would be nice
if the pools would have a separate cache.
I now found a solution for this: Just use more than one fpm-master
that is controlling the pools. (http://groups.drupal.org/node/198168)
Is this the way to go, or do you know of another way?
Should this be added to the APC- or fpm-documentation or is it enough
that you can find f.e. it using Google, if you need it?
Bye
Simon
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Sorry, I first posted it with the wrong subject ([PHP-DEV] instead of [PHP])
http://news.php.net/php.general/318898
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Simon Schick <simonsimc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, all
>
> Not to get the bugfix https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=57825 too much
> off-topic, I write this question in the mailinglist here:
>
> Taking the case I have two fpm-pools on different sockets - the first
> pool is responsible for www.example1.com and the second one for
> www.example2.com.
>
> If www.example1.com has 4 workers, they're all using the same
> apc-cache. That's absolutely as expected. But also the workers of
> www.example2.com are using this cache. In my opinion it would be nice
> if the pools would have a separate cache.
>
> I now found a solution for this: Just use more than one fpm-master
> that is controlling the pools. (http://groups.drupal.org/node/198168)
>
> Is this the way to go, or do you know of another way?
> Should this be added to the APC- or fpm-documentation or is it enough
> that you can find f.e. it using Google, if you need it?
>
> Bye
> Simon
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi, all
Yesterday I ran into a big issue I didn't know about before:
There are many ways in UTF8 to save the same character. This applies
to all characters that can be combined of other characters. An example
for that is the German umlaut ö. In theory it can be saved simply as ö
or it can be saved as o followed by ¨.
I raised a question on stackoverflow on that and got tons of helpful
information.
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12147410/different-utf-8-signature-for-same-diacritics-umlauts-2-binary-ways-to-write
If you don't know what NFD, NFC and those are, take the time and read
this article http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr15/ or at least take a
view at the figures 3-6.
As you read, I moved a page from a MacOSX Server to a Linux Server.
During this movement the filenames got converted from NFD to NFC.
Now my question is:
Is this a common issue?
What can I do to prevent it in the future?
Who's responsible of taking care of that?
I myself, Wordpress, the system I use, or I as the
system-administrator moving the website?
For example I don't know if Windows f.e. converts every filename to
NFC, but MacOSX (using HFS+) forces filenames to be NFD compliant.
Bye
Simon
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 3:49 AM, Adam Richardson <simples...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Matijn Woudt <tijn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Haluk Karamete
>> <halukkaram...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Now, the question is... should you use a global include that points to
>>> this library - across the board - so that ALL the pages ( including
>>> the 90% that do not need the library ) will get it, or should you
>>> selectively add that include reference only on the pages you need?
>>>
>>
>> Since searching for files is one of the most expensive (in time)
>> operations, you're probably best off with only a single PHP file.
>
> Maybe I misinterpreted the question, but I don't think I agree.
>
> If you have a 50K PHP file that's only needed in only 10% of the
> pages, then, when solely considering performance, that file should
> only be included on the 10% of the pages that actually use the file.
> Now, there are reasons where you might want to include the file
> globally (maintenance purposes, etc.) Loading the 50K of PHP code
> requires building up all of the associated infrastructure (zvals,
> etc.) for the user code (even if APC is used, the cached opcode/PHP
> bytecode still has to be parsed and built up for the user-defined
> classes and functions per request, even if they're unused), is
> certainly going to perform more slowly than selectively including the
> library on only the pages that need the library.
>
> Adam
>
First of all, I believe PHP is smart enough to not generate bytecode
for functions that are not used in the current file. Think about the
fact that you can write a function with errors, which will run fine
until you call the function. (except for syntax errors).
The speed difference between loading 5K file or 50K file (assuming
continuous blocks) is extremely small. If you split this library, you
would have PHP files that require you to load maybe 3 or 4 different
files to have all their functions. This would require 3 or 4 more file
searches, first the file needs to be located in the file table, then
on the disk. If you compare the required time for those operations,
they are enormous compared to time needed for a bigger file.
Just for the facts, if you're on a high end server drive (15000RPM
with 120MB/s throughput), you would have an average access time of
7ms. (rotational and seek time). Loading 5k with 120MB/s thereafter
only takes 0.04ms. 50k would take 0.4ms. That would save you 0.36ms if
a file only needs 1 include, if you need 2, that would cost you 6.68
ms. 3 would cost 13.72 ms, etc. With an 3.8GHz CPU, there are approx
4.000.000 clock cycles in 1ms, so in this case you would lose for only
loading 2 files instead of one, approx 27.250.000 clock cycles.. Think
about what PHP could do with all those clock cycles..
- Matijn
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 4:39 AM, Matijn Woudt <tijn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> First of all, I believe [A] PHP is smart enough to not generate bytecode
> for functions that are not used in the current file. Think about the
> fact that you can write a function with errors, which will run fine
> until you call the function. [B] (except for syntax errors).
[B] negates [A]. PHP must either parse the file into opcodes or load them
from APC and further execute the top-level opcodes. That means defining
functions (not calling them unless called directly), constants, global
variables, classes, etc. No amount of measuring is required to tell me that
doing X vs. not doing X in this case clearly takes longer.
Now, is that time significant enough to warrant the extra logic required?
In my case, absolutely. We organize our library into many classes in
multiple files. By using an autoloader, we simply don't need to think about
it. Include bootstrap.php which sets up the autoloader and include paths.
Done.
In the case with a single 50k library file that is used on 10% of the
pages, I'd absolutely require_once it only in the pages that need it
without measuring the performance. It's so trivial to maintain that single
include in individual pages that the gain on 90% of the pages is not worth
delving deeper.
Peace,
David
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Matijn Woudt <tijn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 3:49 AM, Adam Richardson <simples...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Matijn Woudt <tijn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Haluk Karamete
>>> <halukkaram...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> First of all, I believe PHP is smart enough to not generate bytecode
> for functions that are not used in the current file. Think about the
> fact that you can write a function with errors, which will run fine
> until you call the function. (except for syntax errors).
I believe this is untrue. PHP generates the bytecode and then parses
the bytecode per request to generate the userland infrastructure,
including classes and functions, for the entire include file. During
the generation of bytecode, PHP doesn't know apriori which functions
will be called at runtime. I suspect if you asked for confirmation of
this on the internals list, they'd confirm this. In terms of errors,
there are certainly different stages that errors can occur, and what
you're referring to are runtime errors. Runtime errors don't
necessarily show up in every possible execution branch. That doesn't
mean that PHP didn't generate the code for the userland functionality.
> The speed difference between loading 5K file or 50K file (assuming
> continuous blocks) is extremely small. If you split this library, you
> would have PHP files that require you to load maybe 3 or 4 different
> files to have all their functions.
Here's where I believe we have a communication issue. I never spoke of
splitting up the library into 3 or 4, or any number of different
files. The opening post states that only 10% of the pages need the
library. I suggested that he only include the library in the 10% of
the pages that need the library. That said, it's possible I
misinterpreted him.
I will say that I do disagree with your analysis that difference
between loading a 5K or 50K php file is extremely small. So I just put
this to the test.
I created a 5K file and a 50K file, both of which have the form:
function hello1(){
echo "hello again";
}
function hello2(){
echo "hello again";
}
etc.
I have XDegub installed, have APC running, warmed the caches, and then
test a few times. There results all hover around the following:
Including the 5K requires around 50 microseconds. Including the 50K
requires around 180 microseconds. The point is that there is a
significant difference due to the work PHP has to do behind the
scenes, even when functions (or classes, etc. are unused.) And,
relevant to the dialog for this current thread, avoiding including an
unused 50K PHP on 90% of the pages (the pages that don't need the
library) will lead to a real difference.
Adam
--
Nephtali: A simple, flexible, fast, and security-focused PHP framework
http://nephtaliproject.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 1:16 AM, Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com> wrote:
> On 8/27/12 6:11 PM, Matijn Woudt wrote:
>
>>> You should never be calling require() yourself. Just follow the PSR-0
>>> naming standard and use an autoloader, then you don't have to even think
>>> about it. There are many existing autoloaders you can use, including
>>> Composer's, Symfony2's, and probably Zend has one as well.
>>>
>>
>> I believe there's one in PHP by default now called SPLClassLoader or
>> something like that..
>>
>> - Matijn
>
>
> There was a proposal for one, but it was never added. You still need a
> user-space class loader for PSR-0, but they're readily available.
>
>
> --Larry Garfield
>
Ah thanks for the info. I heard about it way back and assumed it was
implemented by now ;)
- Matijn
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Benjamin Kahn <xk...@zoned.net> wrote:
> Maybe you are hitting this bug?
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=687975
> mod_auth_kerb using krb5passwd and keepalive and credential delegation
> loses delegation after first request on connection
>
Good question, because it sure looks rather similar.
> On Mon, 2012-08-27 at 17:29 -0400, Mauricio Tavares wrote:
>> Quick-n-easy question: I have my apache virtual host configured to use
>> kerberos authentication:
>>
>> <Location />
>> AuthType KerberosV5
>> KrbAuthRealms DOMAIN.COM
>> KrbServiceName HTTP
>> Krb5Keytab /etc/apache2/krb5.keytab
>> KrbMethodNegotiate on
>> KrbMethodK5Passwd on
>> KrbAuthoritative off
>> KrbSaveCredentials on
>> Require valid-user
>> </Location>
>>
>> And then I created the following test page:
>>
>> <html>
>> <head>
>> <title>PHP Test</title>
>> </head>
>> <body>
>> <h1>PHP Kerberos Test</h1>
>> <?php
>> echo "user = {$_SERVER['PHP_AUTH_USER']}<br/>";
>> echo "REMOTE_USER={$_SERVER['REMOTE_USER']}<br/>";
>> putenv("KRB5CCNAME={$_SERVER['KRB5CCNAME']}");
>> echo "KRB5CCNAME={$_SERVER['KRB5CCNAME']}<br/>";
>>
>> exit();
>> ?>
>> </body>
>> </html>
>>
>> And I have mod_auth_kerb php5 modules enabled in apache. When I try to
>> connect to the above test page using a kerberos ticket, I do see the
>> PHP_AUTH_USER and REMOTE_USER (which are the same). But I get nothing
>> in KRB5CCNAME. Now, if I destory my kerberos ticket and login using
>> kerberos user/pw, At first I do get the filename associated with
>> KRB5CCNAME. But, if I wait less than 15s to refresh the page, I get
>> nothing for KRB5CCNAME; if I wait more than 15s, I will get the
>> filename for KRB5CCNAME.
>>
>> Does anyone know what I may be doing wrong?
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Live Security Virtual Conference
>> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
>> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
>> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
>> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
>> _______________________________________________
>> modauthkerb-help mailing list
>> modauthkerb-h...@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/modauthkerb-help
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 2012-08-28 at 09:07 -0400, Mauricio Tavares wrote:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=687975
> > mod_auth_kerb using krb5passwd and keepalive and credential delegation
> > loses delegation after first request on connection
> >
> Good question, because it sure looks rather similar.
Try the patch and see if it helps:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=522350
Or try Fedora 17 or RHEL 6.3.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Is there a way in PHP to get the structure of a FoxPro table (using ODBC)
without having to query the table? I know I can get it by getting a row from
the table and using odbc_field_type but I'd rather not have to query an entire
table since there is no LIMIT command in FoxPro. I've looked and looked and
haven't found a solution.
Thanks!
Floyd
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 10:46:24AM -0400, Floyd Resler wrote:
> Is there a way in PHP to get the structure of a FoxPro table (using
> ODBC) without having to query the table? I know I can get it by
> getting a row from the table and using odbc_field_type but I'd rather
> not have to query an entire table since there is no LIMIT command in
> FoxPro. I've looked and looked and haven't found a solution.
>
> Thanks! Floyd
FoxPro tables have a header which details the structure of the rows
which follow it. I've never written PHP code to do what you're asking,
but I did write a C program which will detail the header, dump the
records, output the table as SQL and a variety of other things,
depending on the command line switches. I generally use it *with* PHP,
using a system() call, capture the results, and then display them on
screen as needed. The code is on SourceForge. See:
http://noferblatz.com/dbfsak.php
If you download the code and need help, just let me know. I believe the
command line switch you're looking for is -i, as in:
dbfsak -i mytable.dbf
Paul
--
Paul M. Foster
http://noferblatz.com
http://quillandmouse.com
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Aug 28, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Paul M Foster <pa...@quillandmouse.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 10:46:24AM -0400, Floyd Resler wrote:
>
>> Is there a way in PHP to get the structure of a FoxPro table (using
>> ODBC) without having to query the table? I know I can get it by
>> getting a row from the table and using odbc_field_type but I'd rather
>> not have to query an entire table since there is no LIMIT command in
>> FoxPro. I've looked and looked and haven't found a solution.
>>
>> Thanks! Floyd
>
> FoxPro tables have a header which details the structure of the rows
> which follow it. I've never written PHP code to do what you're asking,
> but I did write a C program which will detail the header, dump the
> records, output the table as SQL and a variety of other things,
> depending on the command line switches. I generally use it *with* PHP,
> using a system() call, capture the results, and then display them on
> screen as needed. The code is on SourceForge. See:
>
> http://noferblatz.com/dbfsak.php
>
> If you download the code and need help, just let me know. I believe the
> command line switch you're looking for is -i, as in:
>
> dbfsak -i mytable.dbf
>
> Paul
>
> --
> Paul M. Foster
> http://noferblatz.com
> http://quillandmouse.com
Paul,
Thanks for the info. Unfortunately dbfsak won't work for me since I
don't have direct access to the ForPro dbf files. I access them through an
odbc-odbc bridge server.
Thanks!
Floyd
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I am exporting to a XLS file and the file does export, but when I open the
file Microsoft is giving a Excel Security Notice.
I am sure there is something in the header that is missing or causing this
problem.
header("Pragma: public");
header("Expires: 0");
header("Cache-Control: must-revalidate, post-check=0, pre-check=0");
header("Content-Type: application/force-download");
header("Content-Type: application/octet-stream");
header("Content-Type: application/download");
header("Content-Disposition: attachment;filename=list.xls");
header("Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary ");
I use pack() to write the labels, Numbers, data. If that could be the
culprit.
echo pack("sssss", 0x203, 14, $Row, $Col, 0x0);
echo pack("d", $Value);
I am running 5.2 on PHP and opening the document with 2010 Office on
Windows.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Greetings all,
I am having some trouble with running a stored proc on an MSSQL DB.
I am new to using MSSQL.
$link = mssql_connect($server, $db, $password);
if(!$link){
die('Error connecting to MSSQL database at '.$server);
} else {
$storedproc = "SP_DialerValidLead";
$param = "ValidLeadText";
$stmt = mssql_init($storedproc, $link)
or die("Unable to initialize");
mssql_bind($stmt, "@".$param, $xmlstring, SQLTEXT, FALSE)
or die("Unable to bind
$param:$storedproc<br>".mssql_get_last_message());
$result = mssql_execute($stmt);
var_dump($result);
mssql_close($link);
}
Apparently there is no data getting passed to the stored proc.
The $xmlstring is a valid xml string and the variable is properly set in
the code above.
Is there something obvious in how I am trying to call the stored proc with
the PHP code?
Any ideas or further questions?
Blessed Be
Phillip
"In the Jim Crow South, for example, government failed and indeed refused
to protect blacks from extra-legal violence. Given our history, it's
stunning we fail to question those who would force upon us a total reliance
on the state for defense."
-- Robert J. Cottrol
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Phillip Baker <phil...@freewolf.net> wrote:
> Greetings all,
>
> I am having some trouble with running a stored proc on an MSSQL DB.
> I am new to using MSSQL.
>
>
>
> $link = mssql_connect($server, $db, $password);
>
>
>
> if(!$link){
>
> die('Error connecting to MSSQL database at '.$server);
>
> } else {
> $storedproc = "SP_DialerValidLead";
>
> $param = "ValidLeadText";
>
>
>
> $stmt = mssql_init($storedproc, $link)
>
> or die("Unable to initialize");
>
>
>
> mssql_bind($stmt, "@".$param, $xmlstring, SQLTEXT, FALSE)
>
> or die("Unable to bind
> $param:$storedproc<br>".mssql_get_last_message());
>
>
>
> $result = mssql_execute($stmt);
>
>
>
> var_dump($result);
> mssql_close($link);
>
> }
>
>
> Apparently there is no data getting passed to the stored proc.
>
> The $xmlstring is a valid xml string and the variable is properly set in
> the code above.
>
> Is there something obvious in how I am trying to call the stored proc with
> the PHP code?
> Any ideas or further questions?
>
I just skimmed your code, but the only thing that sticks out is your
call to mssql_connect(). The second parameter should be the username,
not the database. To select a specific database, you use
mssql_select_db() after mssql_connect() returns a valid resource.
However, if you have the choice, you really should switch to the SQL
Server driver for PHP developed by Microsoft. The mssql library has
been phased out.
Andrew
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Only semi-joking line that's been making the rounds lately:
If you want to build a blog, use Wordpress.
If you want to build Wordpress, use Drupal.
If you want to build Drupal, use Symfony2.
There is much wisdom in those lines.
--Larry Garfield, an openly biased Drupal core developer
On 8/19/12 2:52 PM, l...@afan.net wrote:
Hi to everyone,
I was trying to figure this out for the last week or two. I have read tons
of articles that compare Drupal and WordPress, but I still wasn't swayed
to either side.
I know that they are both good, both do the job well, and both have
advantages and disadvantages. For example, Drupal has a steeper learning
curve, but you get more control over the website.
Most of Drupal vs WordPress articles are "emotionally" driven and it
reminds me of the PC vs Apple flame war. I was trying to exclude these as
much as I could but it's hard.
Is there any website/article/benchmark/test/experiment/whatever I can
trust to be unbiased? I need a website that measures the CMS' through
facts, not heated, emotional arguments. In which cases is it better to use
Drupal over WordPress (and vice-versa)? I know the first two words are
going to be "it depends", but let's talk about it in general (for small
basic websites, more complex websites, easy customization, etc).
I found this on one page: "... Drupal was built as a fine-grained
multi-role system where you can assign different permissions to different
roles to do different things (e.g. content editor, content reviewer,
member, etc.) and assign users to these roles..." Does that mean that
WordPress can't do that? Maybe it can, and the quotation is true, but it
is kind of misleading to say that one of the programs does something, and
then not mention the other product at all.
Special points for me are (not a must, though)
- multiple websites with single core (both CMSs have the capability but I
got impression Drupal does it better?) because of maintenance
- compatibility with CiviCRM
Once I decide what to use, I have to stick with it for a while.
Thanks for any help.
LAMP
--- End Message ---
