You can test, but I don't think it's worth the trouble. Virtually all clients support gzip, so you'll only really use one version of your object.
-- Guillaume Quintard On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 8:49 PM, Nigel Peck <[email protected]> wrote: > > I am looking at how best to set up compression on my setup, that is a > Varnish server handing out cached content from a separate back-end server. > In his notes on the subject, Poul-Henning says that there is no need to > store both a gzipped and an un-gzipped copy of requests in the cache, since > Varnish can gunzip on the fly. > > https://varnish-cache.org/docs/4.1/phk/gzip.html > > My question is, wouldn't it be quicker to have both a gzipped and > ungzipped copy stored in memory, so that this does not need to be changed > on the fly? Or is the time taken to ungzip so negligible as to make this > unnecessary? > > Thanks > Nigel > > _______________________________________________ > varnish-misc mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc >
_______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
