All geek questions in one place

APC vs pecl uploadprogress

On the status report page in drupal, I usually find this message (with a new installation):

Your server is able to display file upload progress, but does not have the necessary libraries. It is recommended to install PECL uploadprogress library ( preferred ) or install APC.

But I never understood why the PECL uploadprogress library is preferred over APC , and what is my question today.

Is pecl uploadprogress faster, less system resources, or is it easier to install / configure / use APC?

Anyone have any ideas on why this is preferable to APC? (googlin around for APC vs pecl uploadprogressreturns nothing useful)

+3
source share
2 answers

The second comment of this blog post contains interesting information: Download progress indicator - general problems and some answers : (citation)

The main difference: this extension uses the file system as a temporary storage, APC uses shared memory . And if you want to use a different Bytecodecache than APC or do not want to install APC for any reason, this provides that functionality too.

(Both blogs and this commentary belong to Christian Stocker, one of the two authors of the extension pecl::uploadprogress, so I think he knows what he's talking about ^^)

+8

flash. swfupload.org - . -, . " ".

Pecl . APC . 99% swfupload .

-4

Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/1726223/

More articles:


All Articles