On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Laruence <larue...@php.net> wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Terry Ellison <te...@ellisons.org.uk>
> wrote:
> > On 23/03/13 09:46, Matīss Roberts Treinis wrote:
> >
> > Memcached is distributed caching system, where as APC's user data
> > cache is not. Memcached requires separate server instance (memcached)
> > to operate. APC does not.
> >
> > Yes, but there is nothing to stop an admin of an application-dedicated
> > system or VM configuring and using an in-server memcached.
> >
> > Also, APC's user cache is 5+ times faster
> > than memcached. If some extension is to provide this functionality, it
> > has to be as close as possible in possibilities and speed as APC's
> > implementation has. Memcached is not and never hasn't been an
> > alternative for APC, they are meant for two different jobs.
> >
> > I also agree that memcache is slower because it is out of process and
> that
> > for some usecases the relative speed differences due to these context
> > switches will impact application performance.  Yes, they have different
> > sweet-spots and operational characteristics, but for many usecases the
> > relative impact will be immaterial, and memcached can be a perfectly
> > acceptable substitute.
> >
> > Applications which are closely coupled to high APC data cache usage will
> > probably stay with APC for the foreseeable future.
> Hey:
>     APC is not a pure user data cache,  the user data cache of it is a
> additional function of opcodes cache, that means the implemention is
> restricted by opcodes cache context.
>
>     and to be honest,  I think user data cache and opcodes cache
> should be separated into different modules..
>
>     Yac is a pure user data cache, doesn't have the restriction which
> APC has,  that is why Yac can be implemented without locks.
>
>     you can see a big performance improvement compare Yac against APC,
> http://www.laruence.com/2013/03/18/2846.html  (use google translate,
> if you can not read chinese :))
>
>
thanks
>


+1 from me too :)


> >
> > An SMA-based data cache would be a useful adjunct to O+, so I will be
> > interested in this, but I just don't see this filling a show-stopper gap
> > that must be addressed as a priority.
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > Laurence, you are correct that O+ doesn't provide data caching, but what
> > about memcached and the PECL packages that support it?
> > http://pecl.php.net/package/memcache and
> > http://pecl.php.net/package/memcached
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Laruence  Xinchen Hui
> http://www.laruence.com/
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

Reply via email to