On 11/10/10 11:41, Daniel L. Miller wrote:
For serving local requests for webapps, is there any benefit to
placing a caching proxy like Squid between the workstations and
Cherokee? In particular, in a single physical server application (no
load-balancing server farm or anything else - just a single cherokee
instance).
I realize I could just setup and test it myself - but what fun would
that be :) ?
I've been wondering something similar... but wondering about varnish. I
noticed Cherokee has some support for caching static content. Does
anyone know how well it performs or if there's a noticeable benefit for
subdividing the work and having varnish handle most requests for static
cached content and having Cherokee only handle dynamic content? Was
this covered in any of the load testing I've seen mentioned on the blog?
Also, to echo an earlier sentiment: Thanks for the great product!
Cheers,
David.
_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee
