On Nov 6, 2013 11:38 AM, "Fred Bauder" <fredbaud(a)fairpoint.net> wrote:
[reply] [-] Comment 7 Andre Klapper 2013-11-06
15:31:43 UTC
Closing as INVALID, a bugtracker is not the place to discuss this.
Please refer to the support desk or the mediawiki-l mailing list at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Resolution: --- → INVALID
Rather like the other bug I submitted 10 years ago. Dismissed... but how
about Zend_OPcache_v7.0.3-dev_35188?
This is not an appropriate way to move discussion from bug to the mailing
list.
You copy/pasted some or all of a bugzilla bug but didn't state the bug
number. You moved discussion first to bugzilla and then to this list
without referring readers in the first place you posted to the latter
instances. (better link:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Thread:Project:Support_desk/Zend_OPcache_v7.…)
That wall of text is made substantially less readable because of the
ways
it was transformed from the original to plain text. (overescaped
entities, no line breaks between comments, etc. also the metadata seems to
be missing too.) You should typically just *link* the URL for the bug but
not copy/paste wholesale.
If you want an answer you should give the bug number in question and a
brief summary of the question.
On Nov 6, 2013 12:07 PM, "Fred Bauder" <fredbaud(a)fairpoint.net> wrote:
which has this: "The last caching layer consists of the PHP opcode cache,
commonly enabled to speed up PHP applications. Compilation can be a
lengthy process; to avoid compiling PHP scripts into opcode every time
they're invoked, a PHP accelerator can be used to store the compiled
opcode and execute it directly without compilation. MediaWiki will "just
work" with many accelerators such as APC, PHP accelerator and
eAccelerator.
Because of its Wikimedia bias, MediaWiki is optimized for this complete,
multi-layer, distributed caching infrastructure. Nonetheless, it also
natively supports alternate setups for smaller sites. For example, it
offers an optional simplistic file caching system that stores the output
of fully rendered pages, like Squid does. Also, MediaWiki's abstract
object caching layer lets it store the cached objects in several places,
including the file system, the database, or the opcode cache.
So does Zend_OPcache_v7.0.3-dev_35188 just work?
That's a bit better. Have you considered that you may have to answer the
question yourself?
If you care so much about getting an answer then why don't you test it? or
ask Zend if they have?
What's your goal anyway? surely APC will have a bigger share of MediaWiki
instances for the foreseeable future, right? is there a reason *not* to use
APC?
Also, based on my reading of your thread there's 2 different kinds of
caching being discussed: object and opcode caching. I'm unsure if you've
noticed that difference or which your asking about. (both are mentioned at
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Cache ; see first 2 sections after
TOC)
-Jeremy