At 12:00 AM 10/31/2000 -0800, Perrin Harkins wrote:
>On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Les Mikesell wrote:
> > > Ultimately, I don't see any way around the fact that proxying from one
> > > server to another ties up two processes for that time rather than one, so
> > > if your bottleneck is the number of processes you can run before running
> > > out of RAM, this is not a good approach.
> >
> > The point is you only tie up the back end for the time it takes to deliver
> > to the proxy, then it moves on to another request while the proxy
> > dribbles the content back to the client. Plus, of course, it doesn't
> > have to be on the same machine.
>
>I was actually talking about doing this with no front-end proxy, just
>mod_perl servers. That's what Theo was suggesting.
That might work. Although I think there's enough image files that get
served by front-end proxies that it still makes sense to have the front-end
proxy engines. As a bonus, if you write your app smart with cache directive
headers, some of the dynamic content can truly be cached by the front-end
server.
>I use a mod_proxy front-end myself and it works very well.
>
>- Perrin
__________________________________________________
Gunther Birznieks ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
eXtropia - The Web Technology Company
http://www.extropia.com/
