On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 8:22 PM, Petr Baudis <pasky@xxxxxxx> wrote: > There is a more conceptual problem though - in case of such big sites, > it really makes more sense to explicitly regenerate the cache > periodically instead of making random clients to have to wait it out. Fork off a child to update the cache? > Unlikely. Currently the machine is mostly IO-bound and only small > portion of CPU usage comes from gitweb itself. Except that if it were FastCGI or mod_perl you could just keep the cache in memory. j. -- 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
