You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Gianugo Rabellino <gi...@apache.org> on 2004/06/30 18:46:02 UTC
Re: cvs commit: cocoon-2.1/src/java/org/apache/cocoon/acting HttpCacheAction.java
On Jun 30, 2004, at 6:38 PM, pier@apache.org wrote:
> pier 2004/06/30 09:38:41
>
> Added: src/java/org/apache/cocoon/acting HttpCacheAction.java
> Log:
> Added simple action generating HTTP caching headers to be used in
> conjunction with mod_proxy
You really don't like the pipeline's expires configuration, don't you?
:)
Ciao,
--
Gianugo Rabellino
Pro-netics s.r.l. - http://www.pro-netics.com
Orixo, the XML business alliance: http://www.orixo.com
Re: cvs commit: cocoon-2.1/src/java/org/apache/cocoon/acting
HttpCacheAction.java
Posted by Antonio Gallardo <ag...@agssa.net>.
Pier Fumagalli dijo:
> On 30 Jun 2004, at 17:46, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
>> On Jun 30, 2004, at 6:38 PM, pier@apache.org wrote:
>>
>>> pier 2004/06/30 09:38:41
>>>
>>> Added: src/java/org/apache/cocoon/acting HttpCacheAction.java
>>> Log:
>>> Added simple action generating HTTP caching headers to be used in
>>> conjunction with mod_proxy
>>
>> You really don't like the pipeline's expires configuration, don't you?
>> :)
>
> Is this what you're talking about?
>
> http://cocoon.apache.org/2.1/userdocs/concepts/
> caching.html#Configuration
>
> "Expiration of content"
>
> I didn't even know it was there...
>
> Pier (going to look if his configuration of mod_proxy still works)
While fixing for java 1.3, I had concerns of why this action exists at
all. Pier, please report about your tests with the mod_proxy.
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo
Re: cvs commit: cocoon-2.1/src/java/org/apache/cocoon/acting HttpCacheAction.java
Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.
On 30 Jun 2004, at 17:46, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
> On Jun 30, 2004, at 6:38 PM, pier@apache.org wrote:
>
>> pier 2004/06/30 09:38:41
>>
>> Added: src/java/org/apache/cocoon/acting HttpCacheAction.java
>> Log:
>> Added simple action generating HTTP caching headers to be used in
>> conjunction with mod_proxy
>
> You really don't like the pipeline's expires configuration, don't you?
> :)
Is this what you're talking about?
http://cocoon.apache.org/2.1/userdocs/concepts/
caching.html#Configuration
"Expiration of content"
I didn't even know it was there...
Pier (going to look if his configuration of mod_proxy still works)
Re: cvs commit: cocoon-2.1/src/java/org/apache/cocoon/acting HttpCacheAction.java
Posted by Gianugo Rabellino <gi...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, 8 Aug 2004 19:23:35 +0100, Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org> wrote:
> >> Log:
> >> Added simple action generating HTTP caching headers to be used in
> >> conjunction with mod_proxy
> >
> > You really don't like the pipeline's expires configuration, don't you?
> > :)
>
> I finally got around replying to this...
>
> No, I don't like both of them (the action AND the pipeline)...
>
> As you know our sitemap is _HUGE_, and every single group of request
> has a different TTL. Now, if I were to use different pipelines
> configured differently, I'd have to duplicate my error handlers at
> least 6/7 times... Not very handy...
Yeah, never thought of that but I do see your point (hmm... what if
you do map:mount? do you inherit the error handler?). Still...
> What this action does, in my very humble opinion, should be implemented
> by the different serializers, maybe in the Abstract one?
With the current architecture it isn't really a serializer concern to
deal with the current environment, so I'm not quite sure this could be
a viable solution.
Also, I don't know if the configuration wouldn't be even clumsier.
Keep in mind that you would have to deal with readers as well, and
that you should instruct your staff to understand that
"<map:serializer type="html-3600-ttl"/>" is a different beast from
<map:serializer type="html-nocache"/>. Do you think they'd get it?
Ciao,
--
Gianugo Rabellino
Re: cvs commit: cocoon-2.1/src/java/org/apache/cocoon/acting HttpCacheAction.java
Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@reverycodes.com>.
Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> On 30 Jun 2004, at 17:46, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 30, 2004, at 6:38 PM, pier@apache.org wrote:
>>
>>> pier 2004/06/30 09:38:41
>>>
>>> Added: src/java/org/apache/cocoon/acting HttpCacheAction.java
>>> Log:
>>> Added simple action generating HTTP caching headers to be used in
>>> conjunction with mod_proxy
>>
>>
>> You really don't like the pipeline's expires configuration, don't you? :)
>
>
> I finally got around replying to this...
>
> No, I don't like both of them (the action AND the pipeline)...
>
> As you know our sitemap is _HUGE_, and every single group of request has
> a different TTL. Now, if I were to use different pipelines configured
> differently, I'd have to duplicate my error handlers at least 6/7
> times... Not very handy...
>
> On the other hand, having this as an "action" doesn't really make sense
> (oh, well, I don't like actions, let's not get started).
>
> What this action does, in my very humble opinion, should be implemented
> by the different serializers, maybe in the Abstract one?
Currently, Cocoon cached response (CachedResponse.java) does not store
headers. If you move this functionality into serializers, then on the
second request to the same resource, when resource is not modified and
served from the cache, response won't have any headers at all - because
serializer was not invoked.
Actions (and pipelines), OTOH, are invoked each time, on each request,
so they work Ok now.
Vadim
Re: cvs commit: cocoon-2.1/src/java/org/apache/cocoon/acting HttpCacheAction.java
Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.
On 30 Jun 2004, at 17:46, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
>
> On Jun 30, 2004, at 6:38 PM, pier@apache.org wrote:
>
>> pier 2004/06/30 09:38:41
>>
>> Added: src/java/org/apache/cocoon/acting HttpCacheAction.java
>> Log:
>> Added simple action generating HTTP caching headers to be used in
>> conjunction with mod_proxy
>
> You really don't like the pipeline's expires configuration, don't you?
> :)
I finally got around replying to this...
No, I don't like both of them (the action AND the pipeline)...
As you know our sitemap is _HUGE_, and every single group of request
has a different TTL. Now, if I were to use different pipelines
configured differently, I'd have to duplicate my error handlers at
least 6/7 times... Not very handy...
On the other hand, having this as an "action" doesn't really make sense
(oh, well, I don't like actions, let's not get started).
What this action does, in my very humble opinion, should be implemented
by the different serializers, maybe in the Abstract one?
Thoughts?
Pier