2016-06-06 12:52
浏览 81


Say I want to execute a PHP script periodically, eg. /home/user/refresh.php, I see several options to set up the cronjob:

# Option A: PHP interpreter
*/15 * * * * php-cgi /home/user/refresh.php

# Option B: curl
*/15 * * * * curl -L -s 'http://host.com/refresh.php'

# Option C: wget
*/15 * * * * wget -q --spider http://host.com/refresh.php

What are the differences, other than PHP not requiring an URL? Are there performance considerations? And which way is usually the best? The only question I found regarding this matter does not go into detail very much, and I'd like to establish some sort of good habits or best practice.

图片转代码服务由CSDN问答提供 功能建议

假设我想定期执行 PHP 脚本,例如。 /home/user/refresh.php ,我看到了几个设置cronjob的选项:

  #Option A:PHP解释器
 * /  15 * * * * php-cgi /home/user/refresh.php

 * / 15 * * * * curl -L -s'http://host.com/refresh。  php'
 * / 15 * * * * wget -q --spider http://host.com/refresh.php
 \  n 

除了PHP不需要URL之外,有什么区别? 有性能考虑吗? 哪种方式通常最好? 我发现关于此事的唯一问题并没有详细说明,我会 喜欢建立某种良好习惯或最佳实践。

  • 写回答
  • 好问题 提建议
  • 关注问题
  • 收藏
  • 邀请回答

1条回答 默认 最新

  • dourang20110122 2016-06-06 14:56

    The primary difference is the security access of the user account calling the script. For examples B and C, the security context is executed as the web server user account. For A, it's the one belonging to the crontab owner. If you use option A with a dedicated account to this script, then you've got finer grain access control, because the webserver will likely have other security constraint requirements/extended access.

    Secondly, since you are hosting this script on a webserver at http://example.com, then you've opened up significantly more access to trigger the script. If it's desirable to provide more convenient access to run the script, then this is good. Otherwise it's not only less secure, but it's not as efficient since you also have the memory/processor overhead of running an actively listening web server if it's not already being used for other purposes.

    解决 无用
    打赏 举报

相关推荐 更多相似问题