This is a very interesting question that doesn't appear to have a great answer. I did some very unscientific bench-marking and I was not able to get any faster than in_array for a $haystack with 100000 elements.
PHP 5.5.9-1ubuntu4.14 (cli) (built: Oct 28 2015 01:34:46)
Copyright (c) 1997-2014 The PHP Group
Zend Engine v2.5.0, Copyright (c) 1998-2014 Zend Technologies
with Zend OPcache v7.0.3, Copyright (c) 1999-2014, by Zend Technologies
with Xdebug v2.2.3, Copyright (c) 2002-2013, by Derick Rethans
Sorting Time*: 0.19367408752441
Imploding Time**: 0.0207359790802
preg_match: 0.10927486419678
needle ===: 0.083639144897461
in_array: 0.019428968429565
array_flip: 0.028955936431885
array_intersect: 0.15198707580566
array_diff: 0.15532493591309
//*sort without search (binary search wouldn't add much time)
//**time it took to implode the array
// (no search was performed, this search WOULD take significant time if implemented)
As you can see, only three of these methods took less than 100ms, needle ===, in_array and array_flip. And out of these three, in_array was clearly the fastest. Now the question is how many postfix-es do you have? The running time on in_array will be O(n*m) (n is size of your haystack, m is the number of postfixes), which is a problem if m is also very large. If m is significantly large, sorting the data once and performing a binary search on the sorted list will be O(m*log(n)) which grows much slower, but has a higher initial overhead as shown in the sorting time above. Even better, if you have a very large m would probably be array_flip as each search should only take O(1) lookup after the initial flip.
CODE
Haystack creation
$haystack = array();
function getRandomWord($len = 10) {
$len = rand(3,10);
$word = array_merge(range('a', 'z'), range('A', 'Z'));
shuffle($word);
return substr(implode($word), 0, $len);
}
$numWords = 100000;
for($i = 0; $i < $numWords; $i++) {
$haystack[] = getRandomWord();
}
TESTs
//*Sorting*
$copy = $haystack;
sort($copy);
//implode
$copy = implode($haystack, " ");
//*preg_match_test*
function preg_match_test($regex, $haystack) {
$matches = false;
foreach($haystack as $value) {
if (preg_match($regex, $value)) {
$matches = true;
break;
}
}
return $matches;
}
//needle ===
function equalsNeedle($needles, $haystack) {
$matches = false;
foreach ($haystack as $value) {
foreach($needles as $needle) {
if ($needle === $value) {
$matches = true;
break 2;
}
}
}
return $matches;
}
//in_array
function baseCase($needles, $haystack) {
$matches = false;
foreach($needles as $needle) {
if (in_array($needle, $haystack)) {
$matches = true;
break;
}
}
return $matches;
}
//array_flip
function arrayFlipping($needles, $haystack) {
$matches = false;
$copy = array_flip($haystack);
foreach ($needles as $needle) {
if (array_key_exists($needle, $copy)) {
$matches = true;
}
}
return $matches;
}
//array_intersect
function arrayIntersect($needles, $haystack) {
if (count(array_intersect($needles, $haystack)) > 0) {
return true;
}
return false;
}
//array_diff
function arrayDiff($needles, $haystack) {
if (count(array_diff($needles, $haystack)) !== count($needles)) {
return true;
}
return false;
}
Calling Code
$array = array("foo","foobar","foobazz","foobuzz");
$base = "foo";
$regex = "/^$base(bizz|bazz|buzz|)$/";
echo "preg_match: ";
preg_match_test($regex, $haystack);
echo "needle === ";
equalsNeedle($array, $haystack);
echo "in_array: ";
baseCase($array, $haystack);
echo "array_flip: ";
arrayFlipping($array, $haystack);
echo "array_intersect: ";
arrayIntersect($array, $haystack);
echo "array_diff: ";
arrayDiff($array, $haystack);
All tests were wrapped with timing code using microtime(true).
array_diffand/orarray_intersecthelp here?fnmatchyou do:$value === $needle || $value === $needle . "somePostfix" || $value === $needle . "someOtherPostfix"? Any sort of pattern matching is going to be slower than a straight up===array_reduce($array, function($found, $el){ return $found && ($el === 'val1' || $el === 'val2'); })?