| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:39 |
 neon1024 |
:) |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:39 |
dereuromark |
yes they do |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:38 |
heke |
yes, but ... "pthreads v3 is restricted to operating in CLI only" , curl supposedly gives you option to query multiple APIs the same time , in webserver ... |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:38 |
neon1024 |
Hey @dereuromark do the annotations for Docblocks allow Cake code to pass PHP Stan? |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:35 |
neon1024 |
I didn’t really understand his talk as it was complicated, but is that multi-thread php what you mean? |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:35 |
neon1024 |
https://github.com/krakjoe/pthreads |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:34 |
neon1024 |
Isn’t Krakjoe doing that? Let me check |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:34 |
neon1024 |
I haven’t really used Guzzle though! *disclosure |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:34 |
heke |
lol, is that a wrapper around curl , it would be first time to hear php support multithread ... |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:34 |
neon1024 |
I suppose the thought process boils down to if Cake will be similar to Symfony in providing a way to wire up a number of components. However as Cake is opinionated and RAD I think that’s why it provides it’s own tooling within the framework |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:33 |
neon1024 |
Seems to, http://docs.guzzlephp.org/en/stable/quickstart.html#concurrent-requests |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:33 |
heke |
jeps query multple at the same time |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:32 |
neon1024 |
Pretty certain Guzzle allows for multi request, but let me check |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:32 |
neon1024 |
Multi-threading? Is that like multi-curl? |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:32 |
heke |
@neon1024 Idk, I see curl as the best, because it provides multithreading , ( in which php sucks ) |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:30 |
dereuromark |
you didnt before? ;) |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:29 |
neon1024 |
Going to try out your IdeHelper plugin @dereuromark :slightly_smiling_face: Looks good |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 10:25 |
rchavik |
i'm calling $this->Number->toReadableSize(100000) but the return value is the format string: "{0,number,#,###.##} KB". where did i screw up? |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:59 |
neon1024 |
There are some maintainability concerns, as there was with the phinx/migrations but some libraries are far more established and mature |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:58 |
neon1024 |
Why does the core have it’s own Http Client and not just depend on something like Guzzle? |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:51 |
dereuromark |
you are free to use whatever templating language you want, the core stays lean and simple however at this time. |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:50 |
dereuromark |
that was the scope of my ticket and rfc :slightly_smiling_face: nothing more than that, ever. |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:50 |
dereuromark |
for bake it was just common sense to not use php anymore to generate php, its a bad idea to use a non-standard solution for generating code of the same language |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:49 |
dereuromark |
no, there is no framework decision, it is a opt-in plugin, thats all |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:49 |
neon1024 |
I only put bake in require-dev though |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:48 |
hmic |
yes, it's used internally. isn't that enough to make use of it? - it gets installed now by default so just use it :D |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:48 |
neon1024 |
No harm in using the plugin for the templating though I suppose. I was just curious if there was a framework choice to use Twig, but I guess not |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:47 |
neon1024 |
@hmic Only internally, to sidestep the <% tags. I wasn’t sure if it was going to generate Twig templates as well |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:45 |
dereuromark |
you must have misunderstood the issue that lead to twig being used for bake plugin |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:44 |
dereuromark |
it will not :slightly_smiling_face: |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:44 |
hmic |
neon1024: it's already there, isn't it? bake uses twig now from the discussions here - i did not try recently. but it certainly installed twig via composer update lately |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:41 |
neon1024 |
Is there a rough guess as to when Cake will swap over to Twig? I assume in a major 4.x release |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:31 |
heke |
idk , autossh has served us well ... |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:29 |
hmic |
ssh tunnel is a hack. not more. and btw. if you like your ssh tunnel solution and dont want a proper vpn but ssl "the easy way" - use stunnel instead! |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:28 |
hmic |
thing is: it's there, you just need to use it. an ssh tunnel is another dependency and point of failure - not even possible to easily HA the thing. thats why you dont want it. if you want/need vpn between your database host and frontend webservers - go for a full blown solution *with* HA and proper monitoring, why not... |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:26 |
hmic |
you do know that this article is 5 years old? *lol* and if your database server is on the other end of a slow and high latency link, you have more problems then just ssl vs. ssh performance :P |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:23 |
heke |
why would I have 100+ ssl connections ( Mysql SSL ) between hosts, when I could have just one SSL connection between hosts ( SSL tunnel ). |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:22 |
heke |
@hmic some guys like more ssh-tunnel , https://www.percona.com/blog/2013/11/18/mysql-encryption-performance-revisited/ and autossh works just fine in our case ... |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 09:14 |
birdy247 |
morning |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 08:57 |
hmic |
heke: there is nothing to wander about. one is a dirty hack, the other a common and best practice usecase. |
| # |
Dec 19th 2017, 08:49 |
heke |
I am wanderin which better , mysql through ssl tunnel , or just mysql over ssl ? |