atom feed19 messages in ru.sysoev.nginxRe: varnish?
FromSent OnAttachments
Ilan BerknerMar 29, 2009 3:59 pm 
Kiril AngovMar 29, 2009 4:56 pm 
Cliff WellsMar 29, 2009 8:29 pm 
Chris ZimmermanMar 29, 2009 9:10 pm 
russlndrApr 12, 2009 8:17 pm 
CryptWizardApr 12, 2009 10:54 pm 
jeff emmingerApr 13, 2009 6:34 am 
russlndrApr 13, 2009 7:04 am 
Barry AbrahamsonApr 14, 2009 8:59 am 
Victor IggyApr 14, 2009 3:55 pm 
Barry AbrahamsonApr 14, 2009 7:12 pm 
Floren MunteanuApr 14, 2009 8:39 pm 
Victor IggyApr 15, 2009 10:43 am 
Barry AbrahamsonApr 15, 2009 12:14 pm 
zepolenApr 15, 2009 5:58 pm 
Phillip B OldhamApr 16, 2009 12:20 am 
Barry AbrahamsonApr 16, 2009 7:47 am 
Barry AbrahamsonApr 16, 2009 7:52 am 
zepolenApr 17, 2009 1:59 pm 
Subject:Re: varnish?
From:Barry Abrahamson (bar@automattic.com)
Date:Apr 15, 2009 12:14:03 pm
List:ru.sysoev.nginx

On Apr 15, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Victor Iggy wrote:

@Barry Abrahamson

Sorry, I should of been more specific. I also follow the varnish-misc list, and I have read that gravatar uses varnish specifically for their thumbnails. That is what I meant by static data. So the question still stands, won't it make more sense to avoid the double buffer problem and just use filesystem cache?

Yes, except the vast majority images are generated dynamically, so they don't exist on a filesystem anywhere :)