cocoon-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matthew Cordes <mcord...@maine.edu>
Subject Re: [C1.8.1-dev] Caching
Date Mon, 27 Nov 2000 16:11:46 GMT
> Maybe compleatly unrelated but ... the META tags in
> the output document have alphabetically sorted
> atributes.

Xalan sorts attributes alphabetically not cocoon.  
I don't think this could be your caching problem, anyone 
have more info?

-matt




On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 07:39:57AM -0800, Drasko Kokic wrote:
> I am also having problems with caching and am trying
> to identify where the problem might be.
> 
> Maybe compleatly unrelated but ... the META tags in
> the output document have alphabetically sorted
> atributes.
> 
> The original code (in xsl file):
>   <META HTTP-EQUIV="Expires" CONTENT="Fri, Jun 12 1981
> 08:20:00 GMT"/>
>   <META HTTP-EQUIV="Pragma" CONTENT="no-cache"/>
>   <META HTTP-EQUIV="Cache-Control"
> CONTENT="no-cache"/>
> becomes:
>   <META content="Fri, Jun 12 1981 08:20:00 GMT"
> http-equiv="Expires">
>   <META content="no-cache" http-equiv="Pragma">
>   <META content="no-cache" http-equiv="Cache-Control">
> 
> (Also the atribute names are written in small letters)
> 
> WOULD THIS BE THE REASON THAT SOME BROWSERS/PROXIES
> ARE STILL SERVING THE OLD VERSIONS FROM THEIR CACHING
> AREA?!
> 
> Is it possible to change this behaviour of Cocoon
> (Xalan) ???
> 
> TIA
> Drasko
> 
> --- Robin Green <greenrd@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Reasons:
> > 
> > (1) The combination of this change, with the
> > last-modified-header, lets 
> > clients and web proxies do some useful caching
> > (apart from just images etc. 
> > which they can already cache), taking some load off
> > the server.
> > 
> > (2) It would avoid a lot of XSP junk being stored in
> > the Cocoon cache which 
> > doesn't need to be there because it is never used. I
> > know personally, that 
> > some sites use XSP for almost everything, and a lot
> > of that is not very 
> > worth caching, which means a big waste because it is
> > cached anyway! Since 
> > some people have reported OutOfMemoryErrors this
> > could be important.
> > 
> > >I mean,
> > >this would break each and every XSP page in
> > existence.
> > 
> > No it wouldn't. I am proposing caching no dynamic
> > content by default. The 
> > pages that aren't designed to be cached, would still
> > work. The pages that 
> > are intended to be cached, would still work, but
> > slower because they would 
> > not be cached - until the developers realised and
> > explicitly enabled it 
> > again. It wouldn't break anything in terms of
> > functionality, apart from 
> > caching.
> > 
> > >The default should always be the most common usage
> > and not some twisted
> > >case from some twisted workflow :-)
> > 
> > Hey this is nothing to do with twisted workflows!
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
> http://shopping.yahoo.com/
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-users-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: cocoon-users-help@xml.apache.org
> 

Mime
View raw message