> 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 )

Reply via email to