First I've heard of Cherokee and port specific rules. Guess I will test it out during non busy times. This seems promising as a solution. Less administration and less issues if we run just one Cherokee instance.
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 6:07 AM, Stefan de Konink <[email protected]> wrote: > You can make rules in a virtual server that are port specific. But if this > management wise a good idea? I doubt it. > > Stefan > > Op 30 sep 2009 om 10:02 heeft pub crawler <[email protected]> het > volgende geschreven:\ > >> Wanted to run what we are doing by everyone on the list and see if >> anyone can help us improve upon what we are doing. >> >> Currently for our static content (JPGs, GIFs, CSS, etc.) we do this: >> >> INTERNET ---> Cherokee:80 ---> Varnish:81 ---> Cherokee:82 >> >> We use Varnish for caching and some of the cache type control features >> it has. If something is not found in Varnish cache it forwards >> request over to another instance of Cherokee on port 82. The 2nd >> instance of Cherokee is another separate instance - different than our >> main port 80 Cherokee. >> >> Is there any way to combine the two Cherokee instances into one? >> >> Does Cherokee support setting up Virtual Servers tied to specific ports? >> (i.e. images.pubcrawler.com:80 images.pubcrawler.com:82) >> _______________________________________________ >> Cherokee mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee > _______________________________________________ Cherokee mailing list [email protected] http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee
