APC beeing bundled with PHP in future is indeed a good argument to keep an eye on it. My point was more on those comparisons all around. Especially those about frameworks ... ;o) where symfony is always the worst.
Michael On Feb 27, 9:30 am, noel t <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > First I'd just say that Michael here is right -- your mileage may vary. > Do your own comparisons. But as someone who started with eaccelerator, > tried xcache, and finally settled on APC, I'd have to vouch for APC in > the end. My benchmarks show all three to be basically identical in > performance. Published, informal benches on the net show xcache to be > the #1. I had problems with xcache and symfony as symfony tries to call > admin only functions of xcache which triggers an htauth call. That was > with symfony 1.0b4. Not sure if xcache support was worked on since then. > > As far as configuration goes, eaccelerator and APC are pretty damn > easy. Xcache has a lot more settings and not the greatest explanation > as to what they all do. But Xcache lets you use more than 1 memory > segment so mutli processor machines can take advantage of that (so they > say). APC seems to allow you to use more than one segment, but the > included tool to monitor it doesn't seem to support more than one. > AFAIK, eaccelerator only uses one segment. > > Finally I'd just like to point out as I did in an earlier post to the > group that while performance differences between the three might be slim > enough to be considered moot, if upgrading to the latest/greatest php > breaks your accelerator as it did with eaccelerator when I moved to > 5.2.1, you're going to be forced to hold back, switch while in > production to another opcode cache, or stop using them altogether. APC > being in PECL is an official part of php and slated for inclusion in > php6. That is a point worth consideration I think. > > Noel > > p.s. I didn't notice much difference in memory consumption between > eaccelerator or APC. Both consume around 16megs of RAM for our project. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Well, > > > i tried APC (disabled eA for that) and run it on my own "heavy" > > backend. The speed numbers are almost the same (APC is still slower). > > The memory usage however is with APC 1.6 times higher than with eA. I > > used default settings on both accelerators ... > > > I recommend to make own tests with both (any) accelerators, it's not > > that difficult. It is much better than relay on this comparisons ... > > > Michael > > > On Feb 19, 5:31 pm, Lukas Kahwe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Slick Rick wrote: > > >>> There is a known issue with eAccelerator and PHP 5.2 that cause infinite > >>> loops and segfaults. I would stick with 5.1 until this is fixed. > > >> or give pecl::APC a try .. as things stand APC has a good chance of > >> being bundled with PHP6. > > >> regards, > >> Lukas --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "symfony developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/symfony-devs?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
