Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

PHP 5 and 7.0 end of life

hackertarget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 122 posts

Re: PHP 5 and 7.0 end of life

#111

Post by pbhjpbhj »

userbinator wrote: post #103
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm well in to repairing and longevity, but that 80yo fridge is going to be inefficient and badly thermally insulated I imagine (and if it's electric it's probably hazardous too). Upgrading isn't just about shiny-shiny, and keeping old stuff isn't always best.

You'd be surprised how efficient they are; give this article a read: https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/article/choosing-an-ene... What most people consider "old" for a fridge is probably late 70s/early 80s, and those ones did use a lot of power for some reason or other (usually defrost heaters); but the ones much older than that used far less. I'm restoring it, which does mean rewiring and putting better insulatio…

I'd be interested in a quantitative analysis of the power usage. Are you documenting the refurb anywhere?

https://www.thegeoexchange.org/fridge-power-consumption/inde... - shows a saving of two-thirds by replacing a 20yo fridge with a mid-range model (they say they could have saved about 80% power use with a more expensive model).

Re: PHP 5 and 7.0 end of life

#112

Post by k__ »

rleigh wrote: post #107
johnchristopher wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean ?

He's exactly the same as the other guy. Under the guise of modernisation, he's introducing even more technical debt and gratuitous overcomplexity. Look at it this way. In 15 years time, that ancient docker setup may well be as insecure, unmaintainable and poorly-regarded as PHP5 is today. And another generation of admins and developers will repeat the cycle all over again with the new hotness of day.

I didn't even think about the missing updates in the future when I wrote my comment.

It just all sounded to me like someone hating at one dude who did crappy development and then tries to solve that problem with Docker instead of a process.

In my eyes, Docker is the epitome of crappy development. "Oh we don't care anymore, we just throw all into a container and be done with it."

Re: PHP 5 and 7.0 end of life

#113

Post by hajile »

bubblicious wrote: post #65
perfunctory wrote: post #29

For a second, after reading the title, I thought PHP as a whole was end of life. That'd be fun. Which also made me think - does anybody know an example of a widely used programming language that voluntarily discontinued?

Visual J++ comes to mind

MS got sued by Sun Microsystems and discontinuing J++ was part of the settlement. I'm not sure that is really voluntary.

Re: PHP 5 and 7.0 end of life

#114

Post by johnchristopher »

k__ wrote: post #112
rleigh wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's exactly the same as the other guy. Under the guise of modernisation, he's introducing even more technical debt and gratuitous overcomplexity. Look at it this way. In 15 years time, that ancient docker setup may well be as insecure, unmaintainable and poorly-regarded as PHP5 is today. And another generation of admins and developers will repeat the cycle all over again with the new hotness of day.

I didn't even think about the missing updates in the future when I wrote my comment. It just all sounded to me like someone hating at one dude who did crappy development and then tries to solve that problem with Docker instead of a process. In my eyes, Docker is the epitome of crappy development. "Oh we don't care anymore, we just throw all into a container and be done with it."

> In my eyes, Docker is the epitome of crappy development. "Oh we don't care anymore, we just throw all into a container and be done with it."

That's actually the plan. We need to keep it running in legacy mode until the updated and patched version of the app is ready to be deployed. Main org IT don't want EOL and unsupported pieces in its infra anymore unless it can isolate it.

Next version is going to be service based and scalable. A WAMP installation can't do that.

Am I being trolled ? Because I don't see the people bashing docker or glorifying the values of an insecure but simple setup giving alternatives.

What should we do then ?

Re: PHP 5 and 7.0 end of life

#115

Post by aorth »

davesmith1983 wrote: post #85
hnarn wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RHEL 7 provides Apache 2.4 and PHP version 5.4, and RHEL/CentOS 7 is going to be around for a while.

I am running CentOS 7 and that is still using 5.4. I am only running a forum, IRC and some other things and I don't really want to bother with third party packages.

For what it's worth I've been using PHP 5.6 via Software Collections (SCL) on my CentOS 7 system for a few years with zero problems. I think I will update to PHP 7.x soon (probably 7.2).

https://www.softwarecollections.org/en/scls/rhscl/rh-php72/

Re: PHP 5 and 7.0 end of life

#116

Post by k__ »

johnchristopher wrote: post #114
k__ wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't even think about the missing updates in the future when I wrote my comment. It just all sounded to me like someone hating at one dude who did crappy development and then tries to solve that problem with Docker instead of a process. In my eyes, Docker is the epitome of crappy development. "Oh we don't care anymore, we just throw all into a container and be done with it."

> In my eyes, Docker is the epitome of crappy development. "Oh we don't care anymore, we just throw all into a container and be done with it." That's actually the plan. We need to keep it running in legacy mode until the updated and patched version of the app is ready to be deployed. Main org IT don't want EOL and unsupported pieces in its infra anymore unless it can isolate it. Next version is going to be service ba…

Maybe you found one of the few good reasons to use Docker, I don't know.

I just have the impression, Docker is the way if people don't really want to think about a solution.

Re: PHP 5 and 7.0 end of life

#117

Post by beatgammit »

parliament32 wrote: post #95
onion2k wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"it's old so let's change it" That's very rarely the thought process in the real world when you're dealing with a production system though. Most developers who have the seniority and experience to make the call to upgrade something aren't just upgrading for the fun of it. It's more like... "it's old and hundreds of security patches and performance improvements have been released in versions that have come along since…

But that sounds exactly what GP is doing, "I am in the process of dockerizing almost everything in sight." Why do you need Docker to run a WAMP server?

You don't need it, but it certainly helps you know what your environment is so you can upgrade/patch one piece at a time without affecting everything. Need a new libc for your database? Feel free to upgrade it without worrying if your webserver or plugins will break. Also, you can more exactly replicate your production environment on your local development machine or replace production if the machine dies.

I love docker for anything where I'm not going to be running whatever is in the repository of whatever Linux distribution I'm running.

Re: PHP 5 and 7.0 end of life

#118

Post by johnchristopher »

parliament32 wrote: post #95
onion2k wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"it's old so let's change it" That's very rarely the thought process in the real world when you're dealing with a production system though. Most developers who have the seniority and experience to make the call to upgrade something aren't just upgrading for the fun of it. It's more like... "it's old and hundreds of security patches and performance improvements have been released in versions that have come along since…

But that sounds exactly what GP is doing, "I am in the process of dockerizing almost everything in sight." Why do you need Docker to run a WAMP server?

That WAMP server is serving multiple virtual hosts. We now need to be able to migrate some services living behind those hosts under different stack versions. Some services are production ready and can be deployed with a more recent LAMP stack but some can't. I don't have an infinite number of servers to put all those services on but I do have the resources for containers.

Reminder: when that WAMP server is down (which is an issue all by itself, the physical server has downtime as well), everything is down. Even static websites.

Re: PHP 5 and 7.0 end of life

#119

Post by userbinator »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #111
userbinator wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd be surprised how efficient they are; give this article a read: https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/article/choosing-an-ene... What most people consider "old" for a fridge is probably late 70s/early 80s, and those ones did use a lot of power for some reason or other (usually defrost heaters); but the ones much older than that used far less. I'm restoring it, which does mean rewiring and putting better insulatio…

I'd be interested in a quantitative analysis of the power usage. Are you documenting the refurb anywhere? https://www.thegeoexchange.org/fridge-power-consumption/inde... - shows a saving of two-thirds by replacing a 20yo fridge with a mid-range model (they say they could have saved about 80% power use with a more expensive model).

I'm not, but someone on YouTube has taken the time to document restoring one of similar vintage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_ysVqppaN0

The article you posted shows they went from 1300kWh/yr to 412kWh/yr. Amusing that it says "Some use as little as 255 kwh/year" when the article I posted mentions 244kWh/yr for the 30s Monitor-Top. (Mine is a "flat top" but has a very similar refrigeration system.) Like I said, average power consumption went up after the late 60s/early 70s, but before that they used less.

The compressor in mine draws <100W when running. A quick calculation shows that if it was running 24/7 that would be almost 900kWh/yr, but it definitely won't be running that much --- duty cycles I've found for these old ones vary from 15-20%, giving around 200kWh/yr, still very good. How often you open it and/or put warm things in probably has a higher impact on total power consumption than anything else.

Re: PHP 5 and 7.0 end of life

#120

Post by pbhjpbhj »

userbinator wrote: post #119
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be interested in a quantitative analysis of the power usage. Are you documenting the refurb anywhere? https://www.thegeoexchange.org/fridge-power-consumption/inde... - shows a saving of two-thirds by replacing a 20yo fridge with a mid-range model (they say they could have saved about 80% power use with a more expensive model).

I'm not, but someone on YouTube has taken the time to document restoring one of similar vintage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_ysVqppaN0 The article you posted shows they went from 1300kWh/yr to 412kWh/yr. Amusing that it says "Some use as little as 255 kwh/year" when the article I posted mentions 244kWh/yr for the 30s Monitor-Top. (Mine is a "flat top" but has a very similar refrigeration system.) Like I said, a…

Thanks for that.

This is extremely surprising, no. Motor/compressor/refrigerant/insulation design have all improved considerably.

Any insight there?

Usage patterns clearly have an impact, but I doubt they change much for a particular family across models -- some models have little doors for heavy use items to reduce air exchange, compartments probably make a big difference ('glass' shelves instead of wire).

Interesting. /beardStroke

Post reply on HN