Justin Patrin wrote:
On 10/14/06, Gregory Beaver <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
#2 libraries need to be opcode cache-friendly (require instead of
require_once, or a class loader)
Could you explain more about this (or point us to some resources on
it)? This is the first I've heard of require_once not being ok to use.
Why in the world would using _once break an opcode cache?
Ok, looking myself I found:
http://www.phpinsider.com/smarty-forum/viewtopic.php?t=7674&sid=a4a5feb6971f5dd4201d34aa6327d4d3
which links to a post by Rasmus explaining this somewhat:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=php-dev&m=113883455711935&w=2
and a post to the lighttpd forum:
http://forum.lighttpd.net/topic/864
Rasmus' message says he's looking into ways to fix this and tihs was
back in Feb. Perhaps he's fixed it by now? (I'm not subscribed to
php-internals, so...)
We don't have a decent fix. And it isn't that it breaks an opcode
cache, just that it isn't very efficient because we end up with a
useless open() syscall. In general you are way better off declaring
your dependencies up front and avoiding include spaghetti. No matter
what we do, if a script makes 5 calls to require_once on the same file
that is always going to be way slower than a better organized
application that makes a single call to require. We should be
encouraging the latter, not the former.
-Rasmus
