> From: Brian Pane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >Can you really benchmark speed differences between the two? > > > > Yes. And the difference is quite large. You've tried out Apache with the two different methods of exclusion and found that the LogExclude method results in a server that can serve significantly more traffic? I'm surprised! > I'm mildly alarmed that we're actually advocating it as a general-purpose > solution in the documentation URLs listed above; we really should warn > readers that the processing cost scales linearly with the number of rules. There are many directives in apache that work like this, including name-virtual hosts, Redirects, Aliases, etc. My guess is that for 99% of cases, all these things put together are lost in the backround noise of disk/network speed. Now, for those 1% of cases where these things matter, I'm fully in favour of designing fast-path shortcuts so that someone who wants a really fast, but not too flexible, server can have it. But we should try to do it in a way that doesn't make configuration terribly complicated. Joshua.
