On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 11:07:46AM -0700, Todd Walton wrote:
> On Tue, 13 May 2003, Toad wrote:
>
> > On Sun, May 11, 2003 at 12:22:09PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > > Nick Tarleton (nickptar at mindspring.com) wrote:
> > >
> > > > Point raised by greycat on #freenet on OPN (btw, which server is
> > > > mirrored by
> > > > #freenet-opn on IIP?): The error pages (the biggest offenders, but all
> > > > gateway pages really) require 62 connections for all the images! Could
> > > > this
> > > > not be reduced greatly and save a LOT of loopback bandwidth and CPU
> > > > time?
> > >
> > > That was cut and pasted from a Freenet site that I read, who asked
> > > that I not name the source ("so it doesn't get summarily dismissed").
> > > In full:
> > >
> > > I Protest - Freenet's "Couldn't Retrieve Key" error page is ruining
> > > the use of Freesite Iframes for no good reason . Every time the
> > > "Couldn't Retrieve Key" appears there is 62 browser connections to
> > > Freenet, yes 62. One to bring up the page and 61 for a dazzling
> >
> > 62 is ridiculous. I very much doubt that there are 62 UNIQUE files being
> > fetched. Maybe there is a problem with the headers not being
> > sufficiently cache permissive?
>
> When you say 62 is ridiculous, do you mean that it's ridiculous that the
> page would require that many connections to be obtained, or do you mean
> that 62 is more than should be needed, and that this person is doing
> something wrong?
I am saying that it is ridiculous that the page would require 62
_connections_. It has 62 <img src=...>'s, but most of them are repeats,
and all the images should be cached as we set a 24 hour expiry time.
>
> Ridiculous which way?
>
> I haven't measured exactly how much load the DNF page creates, but I have
> noticed that when I have multiple tabs open, all loading Freenet pages,
> and one of them DNFs, the DNF page will load very slowly. The page will
> load, but each little block of the picture will take a while to show up.
> However, I like the look. It's aesthetically pleasing. Of course,
> "technically pleasing" counts as well.
Curious. Have you disabled caching in the browser?
>
> If the error pages are changed, I suggest keeping Hops. Strong branding
> is undoubtedly a good thing for Freenet at this time.
Yes.
>
> Would it be too much burden to externalize the error pages? When fred
> issues a DNF, for example, fetch DNF.html from the hard drive. RNFs fetch
> RNF.html.
Then we would have to write it out on installation; currently everything
runs from the JAR file.
>
> -todd
_______________________________________________
devl mailing list
devl at freenetproject.org
http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
