]OT] http-authorization:
Tim
ignored_mailbox at yahoo.com.au
Fri Dec 2 15:44:43 UTC 2005
On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 07:57 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> The slowness depends on how your cgi executes. If it is a perl
> script loading perl on every hit it will be slower. If you
> use php, mod_perl, fastcgi, speedycgi, java, etc. where the
> interpreter is loaded once for many hits you won't really see
> a speed difference.
As well as how well you write your program... It does seem however,
that nearly every dynamically generated site that I've come across
behaves like it's on a 16 MHz 486.
> As far as caching goes, it shouldn't make any difference.
Many things will not cache URIs with parameters.
e.g. <http://example.com/cgi?some+parameters>
In the belief that they might be caching something that they really
shouldn't.
> Anything with basic authentication set should not be cached anyway
> except by the local browser.
That actually was my main concern (no local caching). Time and time
again I've used incredibly slow HTTPS sites where nothing is cacheable.
I can't back track (nothing loads, or the server throws a wobbly). I
can only navigate via the links on the page. Tough luck if the idiot
webmaster made it impossible to go back to where you need to go.
--
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
More information about the users
mailing list