cocoon-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gerald Aichholzer" <>
Subject Re: Should static files be cached serverside?
Date Thu, 09 Sep 2004 15:37:47 GMT
On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 08:11:56 -0700 (PDT), Ralph Goers  
<> wrote:

> Gerald Aichholzer said:
>> On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 07:34:10 -0700 (PDT), Ralph Goers
>> Well, by clicking on a href="/miracle/app/cook/info.gif" in my
>> xhtml-source-code my browser connects to the following address:
>>    http://server:8888/miracle/app/cook/info.gif
>> But if I want to serve static content with apache, it should be
>>    http://server:80/miracle/app/cook/info.gif
>> Do I have to modify my generated xhtml-code to achieve this or
>> do I have to edit apache's configuration file only?
> When done properly your links will be the same as they are.  All incoming
> requests go to apache at port 80. Apache forwards the stuff it isn't
> handling to the servlet container (in this case at 8888).  This is an
> extremely common configuration (not just for Cocoon). You should search
> the Apache http server site for more information.

Hi Ralph,

thanx for your answer - in my test some days ago using TinyWeb
I was explicitly putting "http://server:80/" as prefix to the
href- resp. src-attribute values.

Anyway - I'm not quite sure if serving static content using
Apache would be an advantage in my situation. My application
reads sentences of a symbolic language from a XML-source and
converts the data to XHTML. The resulting page in the browser
contains many images, but there're many duplicates (because
most symbols are used two or more times).

Might cocoon's caching be an advantage under this circum-

Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message