On 8/6/06, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
also sprach Thibaut VARENE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.06.2128 +0100]:
> I'm quite surprised. I have 1887 subdirectories in one of my test
> folders. It loads in slightly under 20s in firefox, on a 800Mhz cpu,
> which i find quite /acceptable/ for such an amount of data. My tests
> with text only doesn't show much difference. Given firefox only
> downloads one copy of the icons and then caches it, I wonder what
> could make it that slow to display the page. Still, i'll think about
> it
I don't know, maybe because I *am* going over a VPN link? But
tcpdump confirms that the files are only downloaded once. But
really, it takes about 20 seconds to load my directory, and the
extended statusbar for firefox then says it downloaded 2100 images
and 2Mb of data. I find 20 seconds way too long. :)
have you measured with a previous version of musicindex to make sure?
I'll do some testing on my side, cause tbh, I'm quite dubious there's
such a difference, given the amount of data effectively transfered is
about the same. Rendering time is a matter of the client, not the
server ;)
HTH
T-Bone
--
Thibaut VARENE
http://www.parisc-linux.org/~varenet/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
