Re: kernel.org mirroring (Re: [GIT PULL] MMC update)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Martin Langhoff wrote:
On 12/11/06, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Sure, if the proxies actually do the rigth thing (which they may or may
not do)

For a high-traffic setup like kernel.org, you can setup a local
reverse proxy -- it's a pretty standard practice. That allows you to
control a well-behaved and locally tuned caching engine just by
emitting good headers.

It beats writing and maintaining an internal caching mechanism for
each CGI script out there by a long mile. It means there'll be no
further tunables or complexity for administrators of other gitweb
installs.

If gitweb produced cache-friendly headers, squid could definitely serve as an HTTP front-end ("HTTP accelerator" mode in squid talk).

In fact, given kernel.org's slave1/slave2<->master setup, that's a pretty natural fit for caching files and/or cache-aware CGI output.

You could even replace rsync to the slaves, if squid was serving as the front-end accelerator running on the slaves, communicating to the master.

squid is smart enough to hold off a thundering herd, and only pulls single cacheable copies of files as needed.

	Jeff


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]