----- Original Message ----- From: "Torsten Curdt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 5:20 AM Subject: Re: [important proposal] Cocoon as official Apache project
> Advantages to the Apache reverse proxy solution is that > 1) Many Cocoon pages can be cached, incurring much lighter load on the > actual application servers. Also if there is a temporary downtime for the > app server, visitors are likely to see at least the top level site pages. > How would we split the site then? Keep the current one on the apache machine and have only the samples and dynamic pages served by cocoondev.org? Well, if we are given our own directory on the apache server, we can configure and reconfigure mod_proxy on it without affecting the main httpd.conf. With mod_proxy and mod_disk_cache, we won't need to host any content on the web server. mod_cache automatically stores locally cacheable content and content withe expiration dates. I am using this combination on production systems. http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/mod/mod_cache.html http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/mod/mod_proxy.html > 2) It is much easier to modify an apache config file, then it is to modify > a DNS table. I don't mean editing the files, but the process it involves to > obtain permission for modification. >aggreed. IMO we should use DNS only if cocoondev.org makes it under the umbrella of apache anyway. >Does anyone know if mod_proxy still supports only HTTP 1.0? >From the 2.0 docs: "This module implements a proxy/gateway for Apache. It implements proxying capability for FTP, CONNECT (for SSL), HTTP/0.9, HTTP/1.0, and HTTP/1.1. The module can be configured to connect to other proxy modules for these and other protocols." Ivelin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
