Storage of php-semi files in memory (not in kesh!)
morde last edited by
Question arose from the
We multiply 100 Byte to the maximum possible number of users 100 * 4 294 967 295 = 4 294 967 295 000 Bite (if I'm not mistaken) less than polygabeit(?). The rational use of PS and the delay in working with ZestkDish is not said. (or say ;%)
Writing in /etc/fstab
tmpfs /ramsess tmpfs noatime,nodiratime,nodev,nosuid,size=512M 0 0
session.save_path and no disk contact!
If it's that simple, why doesn't anyone use it? Have you ever seen such an approach in your practice? What's his danger? Inconvenience, impossibility (complicity) of implementation?
WARN: Modified sessions should not be highly dynamic.
If changes in the code are made and a situation (change of data (addition of variables) in the session) is possible, there is no need to speak about the lack of space in the CD frame for the 4 MLD users. That's not the question.
Used, it's normal.especially when all the application is removed on one server and there is a surplus of operational memory. But it's less convenient if you have a system that grows up and has to scale it. As long as it's small, you don't have enough users and there's little information in the sessions. However, if the system grows up, it will be difficult for you to operate a local hard drive in your memory.
(1) Disk is on the same night, if you have 10 more, how will you access the sessions? Even if you arrange an exchange, you'll have a mass of internal traffic between the nodes, and the more you bring them, the traffic will be higher, up until you've blocked them. It is therefore best to develop a system with a scale-up focus.
(2) Let's say the size's up so much that you don't have the data on the same server, there's no memory of how you're gonna scale this system? How fast can this disk be spread to two servers? There's no problem with NoSQL-Server-- they're clustering out of the box, and what do we do here? Write your own server?
When the system's big, I don't want the original solutions, I want to be reliable, because the different problems are so many and I want to at least be deleted as a class. Disclosure in operational memory is a good budgetary decision if you don't plan to grow out of one server. If this is possible, it would be better to immediately introduce the layers of the application (database, nosql, annex, front-server, statistic server, kash, line of assignments, etc.) and to place them on a home, it would be easier to transfer the system to several servers.
If the system does not grow, if you can predict the workload for years ahead, the disc in the operational memory of the session is a perfectly normal solution.