php-java-bridge-users Mailing List for PHP/Java Bridge

Thank you Jost.  Just as a follow up then, both statements below are
correct?

1.  If a PHP script wants to access a remote java service, the PHP
script need only include Java.inc.  
2.  There is no binary version of Java.inc.



-----Original Message-----
From: php...@li...
[mailto:php...@li...] On Behalf
Of php...@li...
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 12:25 PM
To: php...@li...
Subject: Re: [Php-java-bridge-users] Bridge from PHP

Hi,

I think this is a misunderstanding. A  php_java.dll or a java.so are
used to start Java as a sub-process of the HTTP server.

However, this doesn't improve the performance in any way; if you want a
faster communication, eliminate the number of round-trips (see
java_begin_document()/java_end_document()).

Implementing the communication in C or assembler is a waste of time. It
may even be slower than the current PHP/Java implementation, because you
can't easily cache context ID's in these languages.


Regards,
Jost Boekemeier






      __________________________________________________________
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail.
Dem pfiffigeren Posteingang.
http://de.overview.mail.yahoo.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's
challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great
prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the
world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
php-java-bridge-users mailing list
php...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/php-java-bridge-users

Hi,

I think this is a misunderstanding. A  php_java.dll or a java.so are used to start Java as a sub-process of the HTTP server.

However, this doesn't improve the performance in any way; if you want a faster communication, eliminate the number of round-trips (see java_begin_document()/java_end_document()).

Implementing the communication in C or assembler is a waste of time. It may even be slower than the current PHP/Java implementation, because you can't easily cache context ID's in these languages.


Regards,
Jost Boekemeier






      __________________________________________________________
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail.
Dem pfiffigeren Posteingang.
http://de.overview.mail.yahoo.com

Hello,

I am confused as to whether or not there is a .so (or .dll for windows)
that does the same thing as the pure PHP Java.inc?  Basically, I want my
LAMP (or WAMP) server with no java installed to connect to a remote Java
object server.  I was able to do this fine with the pure PHP Java.inc.

 

The pure PHP Java.inc does what I want it to do, but would not a .so (or
.dll for windows) be a little faster?  I am confused as to whether or
not the functional equivalent of the pure PHP Java.inc can be built from
the source into an .so (without Java on the compile machine).  I guess
another way to put it is I want to eliminate the include() call.

 

I know the FAQ says that this is not a performance issue....I suppose
this is true if the server cache's the Java.inc opcode...but would not a
.so still be faster?

 

So I guess my specific questions are:

1.	Is there a way to build an .so that does what Java.inc does in
terms of enabling connections to remote Java services w/o Java on the
local machine?
2.	Has anybody turned Java.inc into a .so, or is the consensus that
caching the opcode is fast "enough"?

 

Thanks!