2010/7/30 Daniel Friesen li...@nadir-seen-fire.com
That's pretty much the purpose of the caching servers.
Yes, but I presume that a big advantage could come from having a
simplified, unique, js-free version of the pages online, completely devoid
of user preferences to avoid any need to
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 6:23 AM, Aryeh Gregor
simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Strainu strain...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you please elaborate on that? Thanks.
When pages are parsed, the parsed version is cached, since parsing can
take a long time (sometimes
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 7:20 AM, Max Semenik maxsem.w...@gmail.com wrote:
There's already http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:MWReleases that does
server part of version checks for core, it could be tweaked to
supply version information for extensions, too.
It's being rewritten, FYI.
/me wrote:
Last time I heard about it, it had huge problems with security and
code quality. Did anything change positively in that area over the
last several months? If s***c developers believe that all Tim's
concerns have been addressed, they should resubmit it for review.
Sorry, as Jeroen
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.com wrote:
So, we may have 1000x slower performance for our users because they don't
really know about our caching internals.
Our only hope is that most of them are also ignorant that those settings
exist ;-)
There'd be of
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 5:32 PM, Aryeh Gregor
simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 6:07 PM, Platonides platoni...@gmail.com wrote:
Memcached*
Our $_SESSION simply lives in memcached.
So we could do
$fake_session = $wgMemc-get( wfMemcKey( 'session', $session_id ) ) ;
Which of the preference settings are likely to cause this problem?
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Aryeh Gregor
simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.com wrote:
So, we may have 1000x slower performance for our users because they
Στις 30-07-2010, ημέρα Παρ, και ώρα 11:09 -0700, ο/η Neil Kandalgaonkar
έγραψε:
On 7/30/10 8:35 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
Msg::get(). wfMsg()
This seems like a minimum compromise. Personally I'd go all the way to
M::get() or M(), but that would be a bit too obscure and would break
Chad wrote:
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Platonides platoni...@gmail.com wrote:
Bryan Tong Minh wrote:
Also, on places where no memcached or equivalent is available (i.e.
CACHE_NONE), this will not work.
Then you could be using the objectcache table in the database.
No, that's
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 12:28 AM, Jeroen De Dauw jeroended...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey,
There's already http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:MWReleases that
does server part of version checks for core, it could be tweaked to supply
version information for extensions, too.
Although that
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Jeroen De Dauw jeroended...@gmail.com wrote:
..snip..
I totally agree here with Ryan. The idea is to have the repository where
the version data is fetched is configurable, so it's possible to have other
distributors then the WMF, and to turn of the feature
11 matches
Mail list logo
