hello,
On 2013/01/20 9:15 PM, Baptiste wrote:
So why not using F5 caching ability????
Just not make any sense unless you have a good reason I'm curious to know.
maybe because caching on the F5 costs at least 10 to 100 times more than
on the varnish?
if you have a small site (with small I mean a site that will never use
all the power of the F5s you own) caching on the F5 may be a good
solution, but if your site is huge, buying more F5s (or bigger F5) is
surely more expensive than buying the number of servers you need for the
varnish.
maybe the next step will be to replace F5 with other opensource software
(like vls) even for the load balancing... this will happends when you
will realize the F5 yearly maintenance costs more than the hardware
(+3years of maintenance) where to run lvs on... but that's another story :-)
--
bye,
emilio brambilla
_______________________________________________
varnish-misc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
