> Now I will again admit to some overall experience, with even HTTP, so > correct me if I'm wrong: Without squid, I can either cache objects in > a Zope memory cache or in browser caches using headers (that's part of > what CacheFu helps to configure). However, neither of those prevents > Zope from entirely stopping to get requests for cached content. For > memory cached content, it will just be served faster and without > requiring to access the ZODB, but it will look the same in the access > log, and for browser cached content, everything will still have to be > loaded every time a browser is opened anew or when a force reload is > requested. > > Once Squid is up, then I do expect to see a lot fewer requests to Zope. > > Am I missing something major here? For me, you're absolutely right. I didn't mean to stop Zope from getting any requests. I just wonder if repeadetly touching a big amount of objects (css, js, images) may cause consuming a big amount of memory.
> P.S. Just so you guys don't think that I am a complete newby, I did > realize for example that I needed to add some templates by hand to a > CacheFu rule, to what was being cached by default, to account for the > "Composite Page" Plone product I am using (the templates for the > "slots" were not being cached and caused significant performance > issues). I said sorry if I'm telling something obvious :) -- Maciej Wisniowski _______________________________________________ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )