Am Freitag, 14. November 2003 16:46 schrieb Andy Redhead: > > I tend to think that a CMS should *NOT* serve content straight from the > > content repository, exactly for the reasons above: it's hard to > > optimize it for that! > > I agree entirely! > > > The best (IMHO) architectural solutions for this is to have something > > like > > > > frontend <--- repository <--- backend > > > > where "frontend" does the presentation stage and can do inverted > > caching. > > This is the approach I am using (and I want to put slide into the space > labelled repository). > > In fact, this ties in with your point about "bad marketing", I'd like to > use slide as a content "repository" rather than a content "distribution > mechanism". This is why I am raising objections to optimising for > read-speed at the expense of code simplicity and performance of other > "repository" activities.
I agree that the store should not be able to deliver the content in a speed that is required for composing webpages in realtime. So we should leave the tables more or less as they are. The performance issue should be done after fixing all the bugs :-) > > Cheers > > Andy > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
