httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ian Holsman <>
Subject Re: PHP as a filter (was: Apache 2.0 Numbers)
Date Tue, 25 Jun 2002 04:15:41 GMT
Greg Stein wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 23, 2002 at 08:52:09PM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
>>The main difference that I can see is that php is using a filter.
>>i'd say that php's performance would increase to 1.3 numbers when
>>they write there sapi interface as handler NOT a filter.
>>until then php's performance will always be worse in 2.0, as they
>>are using the wrong set of hooks (filters) to communicate with 2.0.
> No frickin' way. PHP is a filter, not a handler. Something else generates
> the content, then PHP parses it and executes it.

It should also be a handler because in the normal case it just reads a 
flat file off the disk.
so that in the >general< case you won't get the slowdown penalty for the
people who are going to be use it ontop of something else.

I'm not saying that you shouldn't have a filter mode.. just that you 
should have a handler mode as well. (and so should mod-include IMHO)


> If you make PHP a handler, then you will *only* be able to run PHP on
> content that *it* comes up with. You'll never be able to run PHP on custom
> data sources.

> Concrete example? Sure. Subversion stores its content in a custom, versioned
> repository. When a request is made, SVN generates the content from its data
> store. Since PHP is a filter this means that we can serve up .php files
> right out of a Subversion repository! How frickin' cool is that?!
> [ I also know some guys are working on a MySQL backend; it would kick ass to
>   store .php files in the MySQL database, and PHP-process them as they get
>   yanked out of there. ]
> It would be a sad, sad, day if PHP ever reverted back to a handler rather
> than operated as a filter.
> If it was a handler, it would have to know about every single data store out
> there that somebody might want to use for producing Apache content. I doubt
> they want to take that on :-)
> Cheers,
> -g

View raw message