XCache vs eAcc?

[yulia]

Right now I'm using XCache in a suEXEc/CPanel setup for shared hosting, and just wanted to know if eAcc would be better?

[mistwang]

With suEXEC PHP, each PHP process has its own cache memory, it wastes a lot of memory if many PHP process running. It is true for all opcode caches.
eAcc store cache on disk, we thought it is a good idea to put the disk cache under /dev/shm, make it effectively an in memory cache shared by all PHP processes, however, eAcc causes high load for some users, maybe due to bug with certain PHP release.

So, we do not have a perfect opcode cache solution working really well for shared hosting. If the bug in eAcc has been fixed, it will get our recommendation.

[ezpnet-ss]

What php release have you tested this to work well with George?

Thanks!

[mistwang]

I am not exactly sure, as the problem seems related to amount of script being cached. Or, maybe the eAccelerator optimizer causes trouble for latest PHP? Not sure.

[yah00]

Is this correct for eAcc?

/etc/fstab
tmpfs /dev/shm tmpfs defaults 0 0

extension="eaccelerator.so"
eaccelerator.shm_size="150"
eaccelerator.cache_dir="/dev/shm"
eaccelerator.enable="1"
eaccelerator.optimizer="1"
eaccelerator.check_mtime="1"
eaccelerator.debug="0"
eaccelerator.filter=""
eaccelerator.shm_max="0"
eaccelerator.shm_ttl="3600"
eaccelerator.shm_prune_period="1800"
eaccelerator.shm_only="1"
eaccelerator.compress="1"
eaccelerator.compress_level="9"
eaccelerator.keys="shm_only"
eaccelerator.sessions="shm_only"
eaccelerator.content="shm_only"

[mistwang]

eaccelerator.shm_size="16"
eaccelerator.cache_dir="/dev/shm/eaccelerator"
eaccelerator.optimizer="0"
eaccelerator.shm_only="0"

create /dev/shm/eaccelerator/ directory with mode 777, this is for PHP suEXEC .

[MikeDVB]

I have been looking into xcache and eaccelerator - how has it been working out for you guys?

[anewday]

I have zero issues with eaccelerator so far.

[robfrew]

Xcache works great with our setup. It's blazing fast. And it also works with the latest releases of PHP such as 5.3. The fact that they are keeping up with the latest releases tells me they are constantly making Xcache better.

If you look at various sites that have done testing on both, they say that eA and Xcache are pretty much neck in neck when it comes to performance.

http://trentadams.com/2008/05/22/xca...-eaccelerator/

[mistwang]

Xcache is not recommended for shared hosting using suEXEC as it does not have a shared on disk storage.

If you want to use the latest PHP release, eAccelerator may not be up-to-date, just be cautious.