[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

RE: Tux and HTTP 302

> From: "Nuno Ferreira" <nuno.ferreira@globalti.pt>
> To: <tux-list@redhat.com>
> Subject: RE: Tux and HTTP 302
> Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 17:27:54 +0100
> Organization: Global TI, Lda
> Reply-To: tux-list@redhat.com

> Yes, I know about Tux being extension-triggered, but how much will my
> performance (not to mention other potencial problems) suffer, compared
> to having Apache lying around *just* for this case

My guess is very little; what % of requests do you anticipate having to send
a 302 response?  It's hard to imagine Apache getting bogged down if it would
be serving only 302 requests (with no actual body).

> if I associate .gif
> and .jpg to my module, 'stat' the filename inside it and send 
> back a 302
> if it isn't there or ... ?

This is certainly the higher-performing case, and probably the recommended
one in your case. TUX is very fast at serving both static and dynamic

> I don't know exactly how to go about that 'or'. When the file exists,
> should the module send the object (the file) back to the 
> client or can I
> drop the priviledge of handling that extension back to Tux's original
> behavior... ?

The module should send the object back to the client.  The demoN.c modules
show how to do this.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index] []