On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 12:45:39PM +0300, Issac Goldstand wrote: > Forgive me for missing the obvious, but why not just use mod_file_cache > for this? > I recall you mentioning that your use of mod_cache was for locally > caching very large remote files, so don't see how this would help that > in any case since the file doesn't exist locally when being stored, and > if the file is otherwise known to be on the file system, there's no > reason to keep it in mod_disk_cache's cache area (in any case, it > wouldn't improve performance - only mod_file_cache would). So what am I > missing?
There are plenty of instances in which moving it to a cache area may well improve performance. For example if you have several terabytes of cheap storage, but a nice U360 RAID-0 as a cache area. Of course the move will end up being a byte by byte copy anyway, since you can't just re-link the inode accross filesystems, but still. -- Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
