On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 01:50:52AM -0800, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Paul Lindner wrote:
>
> > > BTW -- I think where the docs are cached should be configurable. I don't
> > > like the idea of the document root writable by the web process.
> >
> > That's the price you pay for this functionality. Because we use
> > Apache's native file serving code we need a url->directory mapping
> > somewhere.
>
> uh, why couldn't Apache::CacheContent just set
> $r->filename("/where/we/put/the/cache/$file") ?
Simplicity really. This was an example in our upcoming book so I
didn't want to add a filename generator to the code, instead we use
Apache's url->file mapping mechanism. Also this code was derived from
a 404 error handler that I wrote ages ago :)
I assume (since you suggested it) that you can set $r->filename to any
file in any directory without adding a <Directory> config? I'll have
to see how this interacts with the built-in access control logic .
> If you add Bill's suggestion about caching on args, headers and
> whatnot you would (on some filesystems) need something like that
> anyway to make a hashed directory tree.
Right. A more elaborate Apache::CacheContent would have a filename
hash function, and a separate cache directory structure along the
lines of Cache::FileCache.
I suppose that one could put the whole uri->cachefile mapping into a
custom PerlTransHandler and leave Apache::CacheContent as-is..
--
Paul Lindner [EMAIL PROTECTED] ||||| | | | | | | | | |
mod_perl Developer's Cookbook http://www.modperlcookbook.org
Human Rights Declaration http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/index.htm
