On 6/27/06, Forrest Aldrich <forrie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This appears to be experimental.
I don't believe mod_cache/mod_disk_cache is experimental in 2.2.2. It is in earlier versions, but I've already recommended you stay away from those.
How would an approach like this compare to a product such as Squid (in terms of use). Obviously Squid is very much more specialized and requires resources to scale properly.
I haven't used squid's caching, so I can't compare. But a big advantage of mod_cache is that it can be used on the origin server itself -- no need to put a proxy in front. This should reduce the load and complexity signficantly. (It can also be used on a proxy, if you want a multi-tiered architecture.) mod_disk_cache should give you speeds that are better than apache httpd's static file access speeds. In other words, it will be WAY faster than anything that requires database access. Joshua. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project. See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info. To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx " from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|