At some time in the near future we'll need to enable proxy caching on our proxy servers. Right now we are serving a great deal of static content through the proxies, but it would also be good to cache our applications. The big reason we haven't done this yet is moin doesn't support it.
What would we prefer? Squid, mod_cache, or any other "caching" mechanism ?!
I go back and forth about this. I'd like to keep it simple since we're already running quite a few sites (ls /etc/httpd/conf.d/ is quite interesting) I'm open to ides, our current proxy servers don't really have the hardware to do proper caching, but I'm working on that.
If we choose to replace apache completely we need to have all of the features that we currently use on the apache proxy servers. If we don't replace apache we're adding a layer of complexity which may be the best option?
What would you prefer?
I would like to have this done for Fedora 8, if no new hardware is required. So we just need to decide the layout.
In my old web environment i used to have Apache and Squid, running on the same server. It was something like: Apache:80(proxy1) > Squid:8080(proxy1) > (App1)
So we need to decide which kind of architecture do we want, before starting testing the rest.
mod_cache deployed in PT1, and some links added for some trouble shooting...
http://publictest1.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/ http://publictest1.fedora.redhat.com/mirrors/ http://publictest1.fedora.redhat.com/mirrors/mirrorlist(.*)
right now we have mod_cache_mem and mod_cache_disk implemented and working, some tweaks still need to be performed, but looks like we are going in the right way... Soon we should start troubleshooting, benchmarking, etc.
Are you still interested in checking out squid or do you think this is the right solution for us right now?
modcache is currently deployed in:
smolt.fp.o/stats docs.fp.o/
Can we do this for our TurboGears apps too ? We're serving all of our static content from CherryPy instances -- so this would probably speed things up a lot.
Also, shouldn't we do this caching at the proxy layer, instead of on each server behind the proxies ?
Luke, we are currently doing "step-by-step" implementations. And our previous tests were already caching turbogears apps, like mirrormanager.
Everything is being cached on the proxies, both in mem and disk.
Paulo, should we close this ticket now and open up individual tickets when needed?
Mike, i agree with that. The base is ready, so from now on any app owner that wants/needs static content to be cached just needs to open a new ticket and assign it to me please.
Our configuration requirements, imply that the static content is located in http://APP/static/ since that is the URL being cached.
Login to comment on this ticket.