On Wed, 8 Nov 2000, Marinos J. Yannikos wrote: > > Only if you don't already have a proxy front-end. Most large sites will > > need one anyway. > > After playing around for a while with mod_proxy on a second server, I'm not > so convinced; we have been doing quite well without such a setup for some > time now, despite up to 70-80 httpd processes (with mod_perl) during busy > hours. If you can meet your performance needs without using a proxy front-end, then by all means avoid the extra work. If you find yourself bumping against MaxClients and can't easily fix the problem with more RAM, I recommend you give the proxy approach another look. Personally, I avoided it until the hardware costs of scaling without it became prohibitive. - Perrin
- Re: dynamic vs. mostly static data Dave Rolsky
- Re: dynamic vs. mostly static da... Gerald Richter
- Re: dynamic vs. mostly static data David Hodgkinson
- RE: dynamic vs. mostly static data Jason Liu
- Re: dynamic vs. mostly static data Marinos J. Yannikos
- Re: dynamic vs. mostly static data Perrin Harkins
- Re: dynamic vs. mostly static data Marinos J. Yannikos
- Re: dynamic vs. mostly static data Perrin Harkins
- Re: dynamic vs. mostly static data Marinos J. Yannikos
- Re: dynamic vs. mostly static da... Perrin Harkins
- Re: dynamic vs. mostly stati... David Hodgkinson
- Re: dynamic vs. mostly stati... Vivek Khera
- Re: dynamic vs. mostly stati... Marinos J. Yannikos
- Re: dynamic vs. mostly stati... Perrin Harkins
- RE: dynamic vs. mostly static data Jerrad Pierce
- Re: dynamic vs. mostly static data Carlos Ramirez
- RE: dynamic vs. mostly static data Peter Haworth
- RE: dynamic vs. mostly static data Jerrad Pierce
- [ADMIN] Keep those @$%#$ quotes down (was: dynami... Ask Bjoern Hansen
- Re: [ADMIN] Keep those @$%#$ quotes down (was... G.W. Haywood