Re: Firesite cache vs webcat cache

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

1997


It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 15278
interpreted = N
texte = >>I was thinking of taking the firesite cache setting and changing >>it to zero and let webcatalog do it all. > >This is not a good idea, because FireSite makes lots of changes to >the document after WebCatalog hands off the HTML to it. Really you >want both. > >WebCatalog Cache: speeds up things like [include] and any template >processing, because WebCatalog won't have to go to disk to open >those files. > >FireSite Cache: speeds up links to URLs that FireSite deems are >identical, so it won't have to ask WebCatalog to process pages that >it's already done Grant, it doesn't seem like FireSite can use the creation date/time of a WebCat-rendered page when making its decision to re-render or to NOT re-render a previously-rendered page ...... so does FireSite make this decision by comparing the entire HTML of each page it gets from WebCat -- to see if that exact HTML has already been rendered by FireSite?Because if this is what FireSite does, then it would make sense to use as large a FireSite cache as possible ... right?Sincerely, Ken Grome WebDNA Solutions http://www.smithmicro.com/webdnasolutions/... Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:

    
  1. Re: Firesite cache vs webcat cache (grichter@panavise.com (Gary Richter) 1997)
  2. Re: Firesite cache vs webcat cache (Grant Hulbert 1997)
  3. Re: Firesite cache vs webcat cache (grichter@panavise.com (Gary Richter) 1997)
  4. Re: Firesite cache vs webcat cache (Kenneth Grome 1997)
  5. Re: Firesite cache vs webcat cache (Grant Hulbert 1997)
  6. Firesite cache vs webcat cache (grichter@panavise.com (Gary Richter) 1997)
>>I was thinking of taking the firesite cache setting and changing >>it to zero and let webcatalog do it all. > >This is not a good idea, because FireSite makes lots of changes to >the document after WebCatalog hands off the HTML to it. Really you >want both. > >WebCatalog Cache: speeds up things like [include] and any template >processing, because WebCatalog won't have to go to disk to open >those files. > >FireSite Cache: speeds up links to URLs that FireSite deems are >identical, so it won't have to ask WebCatalog to process pages that >it's already done Grant, it doesn't seem like FireSite can use the creation date/time of a WebCat-rendered page when making its decision to re-render or to NOT re-render a previously-rendered page ...... so does FireSite make this decision by comparing the entire HTML of each page it gets from WebCat -- to see if that exact HTML has already been rendered by FireSite?Because if this is what FireSite does, then it would make sense to use as large a FireSite cache as possible ... right?Sincerely, Ken Grome WebDNA Solutions http://www.smithmicro.com/webdnasolutions/... Kenneth Grome

DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!

Top Articles:

Talk List

The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...

Related Readings:

WebCatalog for guestbook ? (1997) Frames and WebCat (1997) (no subject) (1997) calculating tax rates, mail order solutions and version 2 (1997) State Coalition Approves Internet Sales Tax Plan (2002) Emails sent twice (2000) WebCatalog can't find database (1997) hideif/showif causes error if wrapped around searches (2003) set header in DB (no cart) (2003) Up and running ... at last !! (1997) default value from Lookup (was Grant, please help me) (1997) WebCat editing, SiteGuard & SiteEdit (1997) syntax question, not in online refernce (1997) Re:redirect from the errorsMessages.db entry (1997) Help name our technology! (1997) Calculating multiple shipping... (1997) Part Html part WebDNA (1997) HELP WITH DATES (1997) 2nd WebCatalog2 Feature Request (1996) WC 2.0 frames feature (1997)