Martin Langhoff wrote: > On 12/11/06, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote: >> Sure, if the proxies actually do the rigth thing (which they may or may >> not do) > > For a high-traffic setup like kernel.org, you can setup a local > reverse proxy -- it's a pretty standard practice. That allows you to > control a well-behaved and locally tuned caching engine just by > emitting good headers. > > It beats writing and maintaining an internal caching mechanism for > each CGI script out there by a long mile. It means there'll be no > further tunables or complexity for administrators of other gitweb > installs. If gitweb produced cache-friendly headers, squid could definitely serve as an HTTP front-end ("HTTP accelerator" mode in squid talk). In fact, given kernel.org's slave1/slave2<->master setup, that's a pretty natural fit for caching files and/or cache-aware CGI output. You could even replace rsync to the slaves, if squid was serving as the front-end accelerator running on the slaves, communicating to the master. squid is smart enough to hold off a thundering herd, and only pulls single cacheable copies of files as needed. Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlReceived on Mon Dec 11 09:14:43 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2006-12-11 09:22:06 EST