Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 14:53:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 14:53:50 -0400 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.129]:25822 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 14:53:49 -0400 To: "David S. Miller" cc: Martin.Bligh@us.ibm.com, hadi@cyberus.ca, tcw@tempest.prismnet.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com, niv@us.ibm.com Reply-To: Gerrit Huizenga From: Gerrit Huizenga Subject: Re: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000 In-reply-to: Your message of Fri, 06 Sep 2002 11:34:48 PDT. <20020906.113448.07697441.davem@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <13634.1031338659.1@us.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 11:57:39 -0700 Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 932 Lines: 22 In message <20020906.113448.07697441.davem@redhat.com>, > : "David S. Miller" w rites: > From: Gerrit Huizenga > Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 11:19:11 -0700 > > TUX can optimize dynamic content just fine. > > The last I knew was that it could pass it off to another server. Out of curiosity, and primarily for my own edification, what kind of optimization does it do when everything is generated by a java/ perl/python/homebrew script and pasted together by something which consults a content manager. In a few of the cases that I know of, there isn't really any static content to cache... And why is this something that Apache couldn't/shouldn't be doing? gerrit - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/