From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: gitweb.cgi Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:52:13 -0700 Message-ID: <4355283D.2000908@zytor.com> References: <43546492.3020401@zytor.com> <20051018110725.GB6929@vrfy.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Git Mailing List X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 18 18:53:10 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ERuhI-0001vt-B1 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:52:20 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751045AbVJRQwR (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Oct 2005 12:52:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751050AbVJRQwR (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Oct 2005 12:52:17 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([192.83.249.54]:30681 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751037AbVJRQwQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Oct 2005 12:52:16 -0400 Received: from [172.27.0.18] (c-67-180-238-27.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.180.238.27]) (authenticated bits=0) by terminus.zytor.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j9IGqDD8025062 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:52:14 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Kay Sievers In-Reply-To: <20051018110725.GB6929@vrfy.org> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.87, clamav-milter version 0.87 on localhost X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL autolearn=no version=3.0.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on terminus.zytor.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Kay Sievers wrote: > >>This has become particularly painful during the current one-server outage. >> >>Kay, gitweb really needs to be able to do caching, or be run behind a >>caching proxy. Otherwise I will have to turn it off until we can come >>up with a dedicated piece of server hardware for it. > > How about Apache's mod_cache? Worked nicely for me several times in other > setups. > I will look at it and see if I can make it work properly. -hpa