4 ms·
I'd say only positively. Regarding the article, this statement really freaked me out: > So, we’ve got an idea - why can’t we place such a server in front of o
by rtomayko 18y ago
I'd say only positively.
Regarding the article, this statement really freaked me out:
> So, we’ve got an idea - why can’t we place such a server in front of our application and make it cache content for all users in the world?
Seriously? They'd never even _heard_ of gateway / reverse proxy caching? They came up with it independently? I knew HTTP caching wasn't understood very well but this shows that it's so much worse than I imagined.
It's sad that such a fundamental aspect of the web's architecture is just completely off the radar for so many "web developers". That's not a knock on the Scribd folks, it's a systemic problem across our entire industry as far as I can tell.
- wmf 18y agoIndeed. Our processors and OSes have built-in, always-on caching but when it comes to Web servers it's considered advanced hacking.
- kovyrin 18y agoActually I didn't want to freak you out :-) Of course we've heard (and even used) caching reverse proxies - I've just explained the flow of our thoughts and words in the chat room during the brainstorming. I mean one thing is when you know about something and completely different when all pieces of a puzzle get together and you see a full picture.
- rtomayko 18y agoAhhh, I see. Like telling a joke in the first person because it just works better. Well, that's definitely good to know. It does read as if you were forced to discover the concept independently, though, which might be a tad confusing for those familiar with the technique. Maybe it's just me. At any rate, I do like the clear description of the situation and discussion that led to putting a gateway cache in place. It helps make things click.