Re: Summary of "Features" thread on squid-users (fwd)

On Tue, 25 Nov 1997, Dancer wrote:

> I'd definitely recommend doing the compression HTTP/1.1 style, using
> Content-coding. (excerpt from draft dropped in below, for those unfamiliar with
> it). If the cache looks at Accept-Encoding then we're pretty much laughing all
> the way home. We implement any Content-coding we like for Squid (say LZO..I
> have no personal experience with that one, but I'm taking it on faith), and if
> the client says it accepts LZO Content-coding, then fine, pass through
> compressed and unaltered. Otherwise send the object uncompressed (or perhaps
> later, we can arrange conversion to other formats).
>
> Whether you compress the object in storage is a separate issue, IMO.
>
> D
[snip http1.1 spec stuff]

Thanks, I think that keeping it compressed on disk would be the logical
extension..
Received on Mon Nov 24 1997 - 18:36:10 MST