Gabriel Wicke wrote: >A heavily-used content API will perform better and use less resources >when it is cacheable. This will become more important over time, so I >believe it is worth spending a small amount of effort on now.
Sure, I think everyone agrees that a heavily used Web resource will perform better with caching. I'm just not sure futzing around with path names is the best way to try to ensure sustainable cacheability. Is there a breakdown of what in a typical MediaWiki API request takes the most time or uses the most resources (i.e., profiling a local request)? I imagine there are multiple caching opportunities at other layers that don't rely on path name, but it's difficult to say where you might see the most gains without further data. MZMcBride _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
