2 ms·

If you'd spent even a few minutes researching the traffic that my "hobbyist blog that likely no one reads" gets or actually reading my previous comment (why wou

by Encosia 12y ago

If you'd spent even a few minutes researching the traffic that my "hobbyist blog that likely no one reads" gets or actually reading my previous comment (why would I care about XCache on apt, when that was my whole problem to begin with?), you really would seem like less of a troll right now.

kenshaw 12y ago
Have you ever managed / ran a site in the top 500? Top 400? Top 300? Top 200? Top 100? No? Ok, then, moving on. I have worked on multiple sites in the top 100, as well as on extremely large software projects with thousands of coders and millions and millions of lines of code. And actually, yes, I looked at your site, your LinkedIn profile, and whatever. You don't know what you're talking about and are not any good at technology. You may think you are, but you're not. For reference, rank 80,000 is "hobbyist." Break the top 5,000, and we'll discuss whether or not you need xcache or HHVM.
- Encosia 12y ago
  Well, everyone knows that any site outside of the top 10 is just a hobbyist site that no one reads. Scoff! Thankfully, I don't need to discuss with you whether or not I need XCache. More thankfully, I didn't see your poor advice before trying XCache for myself. It makes a dramatic difference in time till first byte on pages that aren't yet in the static cache (and all pages for users who are logged in). How dare I try to improve performance for the puny couple million people who visit my site each year, even though Ken Shaw doesn't think they deserve it? Anyway, I find myself asking why in the world I'm still wrestling this pig when I don't enjoy being muddy, and I realized that there really is no good reason. So, I'll leave you to it and let you have the last word about how bad I am at technology, Linux, updating my LinkedIn profile, using apt-get, etc. Cheers.

2 ms·

If you'd spent even a few minutes researching the traffic that my "hobbyist blog that likely no one reads" gets or actually reading my previous comment (why wou

by Encosia 12y ago

kenshaw 12y ago
Have you ever managed / ran a site in the top 500? Top 400? Top 300? Top 200? Top 100? No? Ok, then, moving on. I have worked on multiple sites in the top 100, as well as on extremely large software projects with thousands of coders and millions and millions of lines of code. And actually, yes, I looked at your site, your LinkedIn profile, and whatever. You don't know what you're talking about and are not any good at technology. You may think you are, but you're not. For reference, rank 80,000 is "hobbyist." Break the top 5,000, and we'll discuss whether or not you need xcache or HHVM.
- Encosia 12y ago
  Well, everyone knows that any site outside of the top 10 is just a hobbyist site that no one reads. Scoff! Thankfully, I don't need to discuss with you whether or not I need XCache. More thankfully, I didn't see your poor advice before trying XCache for myself. It makes a dramatic difference in time till first byte on pages that aren't yet in the static cache (and all pages for users who are logged in). How dare I try to improve performance for the puny couple million people who visit my site each year, even though Ken Shaw doesn't think they deserve it? Anyway, I find myself asking why in the world I'm still wrestling this pig when I don't enjoy being muddy, and I realized that there really is no good reason. So, I'll leave you to it and let you have the last word about how bad I am at technology, Linux, updating my LinkedIn profile, using apt-get, etc. Cheers.