On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Aug 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > How so? I can understand that people get used to it, but it's really
> > bad. extensions should be loaded in the php.ini file. There's really no
> > good reason for using dl() over the php.ini method.
>
>
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 06:30 06/08/2001, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> >On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 06 Aug 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > > > How so? I can understand that people get used to it, but it's really
> > > > bad. extensions should be l
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 19:40 06/08/2001, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> >On Mon, 06 Aug 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > > At 07:10 06/08/2001, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> > > > What if you use 50 different shared extensions, for different
> > > > scripts on the same box? Should
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>
> > At 19:40 06/08/2001, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> > >On Mon, 06 Aug 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > > > At 07:10 06/08/2001, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> > > > > What if you use 50 different shared extensions, f
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Aug 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> > I think the disk weights about the same regardless of the data inside it
> > :)
>
> Yes, but 50 extensions will consume more memory than 1.
Nothing noticable, really. Unless you allocate dozens of megabyt
On 7 Aug 2001, Stig Sæther Bakken wrote:
> > If there were a thousand extensions, we may have to rethink it - but
> > the good solution would probably be JIT initialization.
> Now we're talking! I assume it is not straightforward, what are the
> technical challenges in doing JIT module initializ
