Can anyone verify that there are performance reasons to exclude the "generic" comments from either httpd.conf or php.ini? Personally I find the admonitions and associated clutter to be more distracting than anything else, but I can't imagine that it creates a much of a performance issue since I don't think they are read except at start-up. I'd like to standardizing on just including real configuration comments and scrapping the cruft and can't think of any reason why it shouldn't be fine.
|
There's no performance loss with lots of comments. I agree that the generic cruft is useless, and I tend to strip it out. I follow the same philosophy with config files as I do for code -- I explain things that need to be explained ("HERE BE DRAGONS"), but otherwise if you need to know what something does, there is a whole manual full of useful information on the purpose of | |||
|
feedback
|
|
Comments are not loaded into memory so you don't have to worry about it. I assume you are using Linux. Files like apache2.conf or php.ini are maintainted by the package manager. These files will surely change on next upgrade and things will get messy. I personnaly do not touch the configuration files directly. I use instead the included folders like "conf.d" or "sites-enabled" to create custom configuration files and edit/overwrite current settings. | |||
|
feedback
|