> I seem to remember this in another caching discussion: what about > response headers? From what I recall, browsers won't allow you to use > meta tags for evey header, so simply caching the html won't > necessarily fill every need. > > Could the caching scheme be extended to store and transmit cached > headers as well?
The current system already does. If people start talking about handing off the caching to the web server instead, there's not really any way to do that without customising your web server to some extent. If somebody finds radiant's caching performance inadequate, the next logical step that I can see is to implement the caching as it currently functions in the webserver. That would either be in the form of an apache module or a custom handler for mongrel (I'd say the later would be the best first step). If you've got the sort of traffic where this matters to you (very few people will), your choices are: a) develop an apache module / mongrel handler to handle caching b) pay someone (me? I like money) to do that for you c) rethink your business model so that you have the money for a) or b) Dan. _______________________________________________ Radiant mailing list Post: [email protected] Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
