When I first wrote PHP_Archive the entire point of the stub script was
to handle incoming requests, just like the multitude of applications
that have everything go through "index.php" (S9Y for an example).
Using Phar with MultiViews and mod_rewrite is just same as funnelling
everything through a single regular PHP script, this was one of the
design goals and is a very common practice.
The main difference here, is with web applications you have non-HTML
resources you must also handle - this WILL incur a performance hit over
serving them as a static page. But applications like S9Y, FUDForum,
phpMyAdmin where the *typical* usage is not to serve a large number of
users, this is usually not an issue.
These techniques work just fine.
- Davey
Marcus Boerger wrote:
Hello Andi,
Friday, May 4, 2007, 9:55:23 PM, you wrote:
I think phar is a nice idea but honestly haven't had enough bandwidth to
check it out in more detail. Has there been some thorough analysis on
the performance impact of it and whether this is the optimal recommended
way for our users to distribute apps? The idea is actually very
interesting but we should be pretty certain we're doing the right thing
before we distribute it. We can spend some time looking at it in more
detail.
You guys spent a good effort in such analysis in the past. Would be very
nice to hear something in that direction from you.
Btw, it seems to me that because of the way Apache works for most of our
users it actually won't be that useful and just act like a .tar archieve
which needs to be extracted. This is unless the user implements some
kind of front controller. It would really be nice if we have the 99%
common Apache application use-case figured out and docuemnted before we
put our PHP dev team weight behind it. Or am I completely missing some
magic here?
not at all. It perfectly works for includes. But i have no idea how to use
it from a url directly...well you can provide some tricks. But i wouldn't
recommend those.
Andi
-----Original Message-----
From: Marcus Boerger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 12:44 PM
To: Stas Malyshev
Cc: Edin Kadribasic; internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Starting 5.3
Hello Stanislav,
- you don't need a tool - well php - but hey you probbaly
have that tool
- you can run phar archives out of the box - untouched
- you can extract phar archives and run them - still untouched
- you can provide phar archives that do not require a phar extension
To your question "is phar so important that everybody needs
it in the main source." I think the above means it should.
best regards
marcus
Friday, May 4, 2007, 9:36:22 PM, you wrote:
obsolete set of tools (autoconf-2.13, etc.). Having Phar
in the main
distro will open up a whole new way to distribute PHP applications
which would be a great advantage. The current system of
distributing
a bunch of PHP files has some shortcomings.
I'm personally not sure phar is that great way of
distributing apps -
it's yet another format not supported by standard tools and I don't
really see much of an advantage to using it versus just making a
package with any of the existing package formats and I see
a number of
disadvantages - non-standard format, hard to work with
packed scripts
with available filesystem tools, etc. But that's my opinion and I
fully expect some people to hold exactly the opposite opinion. The
question is however is phar so important that everybody
needs it in the main source?
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Products Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.zend.com/
Best regards,
Marcus
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To
unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Best regards,
Marcus
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
