The real problem here is not the actual server side caching, but the
browser caching. The browser should mark the images as cacheable, so
that it won't be requesting them all the time.
Eelco
Gili wrote:
I don't understand. Why is using "tempdir" not a long-term
solution? I see no contradiction between using a tempdir and being able
"to return images that get cached". You seem to be concerned about
client-side caching, while I am talking about server-side caching. My
point is that even if two different browsers hit the same Page, it
shouldn't regenerate the dynamic image if it doesn't need to --
regardless of whether the client has the image cached or not.
Gili
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 11:52:50 -0800 (PST), Jonathan Locke wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt
_______________________________________________
Wicket-develop mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-develop
