On 10/29/2012 06:57 AM, Gopal Vijayaraghavan wrote:
>>> I've found that it behaves rather inconsistently when people start
>>> returning values from scripts.
>>>
>>> >> function f($a = array(1)) { return $a; }
>>> return f();
>>>
>>> has been a suspect case for some segvs.
>>
>> Sorry, I didn't und
>> I've found that it behaves rather inconsistently when people start
>> returning values from scripts.
>>
>> > function f($a = array(1)) { return $a; }
>> return f();
>>
>> has been a suspect case for some segvs.
>
> Sorry, I didn't understand. Do you mean my change to include_once
> override is c
On 10/28/2012 08:04 AM, Ángel González wrote:
> El 28/10/12 14:52, Rasmus Lerdorf escribió:
>> On 10/28/2012 04:54 AM, Terry Ellison wrote:
>>
>>> From the perspective of a production sysadmin, I've always just set
>>> apc.stat=0 but then cleared the cache following any change. This gives
>>> the
El 28/10/12 14:52, Rasmus Lerdorf escribió:
> On 10/28/2012 04:54 AM, Terry Ellison wrote:
>
>> From the perspective of a production sysadmin, I've always just set
>> apc.stat=0 but then cleared the cache following any change. This gives
>> the best of both worlds: the performance dividend of no
On 10/28/2012 02:41 AM, Gopal Vijayaraghavan wrote:
> If I'm not wrong, this only breaks APC when include_once_override is turned
> on.
>
> My vote is to drop the apc.include_once_override and make APC a bit
> simpler & neater.
>
> I've found that it behaves rather inconsistently when people sta
On 10/28/2012 04:54 AM, Terry Ellison wrote:
> From the perspective of a production sysadmin, I've always just set
> apc.stat=0 but then cleared the cache following any change. This gives
> the best of both worlds: the performance dividend of no stat'ing and
> avoiding the weird gremlins that so
On 28/10/12 06:32, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
On 10/27/2012 03:50 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
Hi!
An APC-level fix might be to fix the include_once/require_once override
implementation to go to the cache first to see if the inode is there and
pull out the cached realpath and use that to check against
If I'm not wrong, this only breaks APC when include_once_override is turned on.
My vote is to drop the apc.include_once_override and make APC a bit
simpler & neater.
I've found that it behaves rather inconsistently when people start
returning values from scripts.
wrote:
> On 10/27/2012 03:50 PM
On 10/27/2012 03:50 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> An APC-level fix might be to fix the include_once/require_once override
>> implementation to go to the cache first to see if the inode is there and
>> pull out the cached realpath and use that to check against the
>> included_files list. The
Hi!
> An APC-level fix might be to fix the include_once/require_once override
> implementation to go to the cache first to see if the inode is there and
> pull out the cached realpath and use that to check against the
> included_files list. The downside is that we will likely end up with 2
> cache
Could you help me with a bit of a puzzle? Imagine a deploy system which
used a symlink to atomically replace the docroot. In addition to that,
say this deploy system just renamed an old directory, then rsynced on
top of it in order to save rsync bandwidth and also to reuse inodes such
that unchange
11 matches
Mail list logo
