On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 7:48 PM, Chris Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It just strikes me that if you already have Apache running - that adding > mod_proxy would have a limited overhead as you already have most of the > Apache code running for the HTTP server adding mod_proxy would not be a > significant extra overhead, You can configure it to have no memory cache.
As we have mod_php and mod_python, the memory mgmt won't work in our favour if we try to use those same processes for mod_cache. > The downside is that I don't think that you can configure it to auto > preload/refresh the disk cache after-hours when the link is under utilised. > I think that you can do this with squid Can you? How? > However I think that there are other tools that would do this more > efficiently in conjunction with mod_proxy. > > Over the weekend I will fire up a VM with 256Meg and see how well it goes that'd be fantastic. If apache w mod_cache and mod_cache_disk plays well with linux's disk buffers, we might have our winner. :-) OTOH, I have no idea how apache2 fares as an http 1.0 /1.1 _forward_ proxy in terms of correctness... m -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff _______________________________________________ Server-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
