Re: [fw-formats] include_path assumption elimination

Why does Cal Evans on page thirteen of his book, Guide to Programming with
Zend Framework, state:

"Heck, it [using set_include_path()] works okay in production if you don't
have more than 5 people at a time hitting your site."

Is there some kind of performance scaling problem with the method you are
suggesting? If so, what is the recommended method for setting a path in a
scalable production environment?

- Steve W.

Ralph Schindler-2 wrote:
>
> Actually, if its not in your systems include_path (as opposed to the set
> for
> the project in say the .htaccess or vhost), the typical place users are
> expected to set this value is in the bootstrap or index file.
>
> Have a look at this page of the quickstart:
>
> http://framework.zend.com/docs/quickstart/create-a-bootstrap-file
>
> That should explain a few things.. Take notice to the set_include_path
> call.
>
> -ralph
>
> PS. Notice the PATH_SEPARATOR const. It will save you many keystrokes :)
>
> On 12/3/08 9:09 AM, "gherson" <gherson@snet.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> That's another solution, thanks. Why not remove the hurdle, though, such
>> as
>> per my ini_set('include_path',...) suggestion? It appears there's a base
>> script per ZF library in which that can be cleanly done.
>>
>> best,
>> George
>>
>> Ralph Schindler-2 wrote:
>>>
>>> Why don't you simply have ZF in your include_path? Is there a
>>> compelling
>>> reason for it to NOT be in there?
>>>
>>> -ralph
>>>
>
> --
> Ralph Schindler
> Software Engineer | ralph.schindler@zend.com
> Zend Framework | http://framework.zend.com/
>
>
>
>

--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/include_path-assumption-elimination-tp20802356p20828491.html
Sent from the Zend MFS mailing list archive at Nabble.com.