On 09/11/2012 05:15 PM, Henrik Nordström wrote: > tis 2012-09-11 klockan 15:52 -0600 skrev Alex Rousskov: > >> Hm... I wonder if we are making a design mistake here by following >> Squid2 steps: one helper to rewrite request URL, one helper to rewrite >> store URL, then one helper to rewrite some special HTTP header, etc. >> Would it be better to extend (in a backward compatible way) the URL >> rewriter interface so that ONE helper can do all rewriting that is >> needed (today and tomorrow)?
> What about using eCAP? Is it possible to return extra attributes such as > store url? Yes, of course. Both ICAP and eCAP have meta-headers that can go both ways. But some people do prefer the helper simplicity, and my suggestion was meant to give those folks a performance boost. If the consensus is that performance-sensitive deployments should use performance-centric APIs such as eCAP while keeping the URL rewriting helpers as simple as possible, I am happy to subscribe to that approach. Cheers, Alex.
