Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of parin.soc@gmail.com designates
 64.233.162.193 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=BE/6KfsmOLY5IgdcWOdvFFW+Ro94WsOMgmUa0kvqasCDgYcwsu4SeITn29A8VyGjBDPEYuADFCI2fubo4j+yrb2g6Zfxl8koqYusSVu3rzAiUTkC33tMtWn790Tp0ltqcCQw1fikcnLuWVH2vS4iSfM/KZF1Jz4eg6ZMd9e+8+4=
Message-ID: <e0f6a05005071423231ad7972@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 01:23:29 -0500
From: Parin Shah <parin.soc@gmail.com>
Reply-To: Parin Shah <parin.soc@gmail.com>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: mod-cache-requestor plan
In-Reply-To: <BEFC16BD.78D2%Brian.Akins@turner.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <42D66FAF.2090709@holsman.net>
	 <BEFC16BD.78D2%Brian.Akins@turner.com>

Thanks all for for your thoughts on this issue.

> > The priority re-fetch would make sure the
> > popular pages are always in cache, while others are allowed to die at
> > their expense.
>=20
>=20
> So every request for an object would update a counter for that url?
>=20
- we need to maintain a counter for url in this case which would
decide the priority of the url. But mainting this counter should be a
low overhead operation, I believe.

> Both approaches have disadvantages.  I guess you just have to choose your
> poison :)
>=20
- I would prefer the approach where we maintain priority queue to keep
track of popularity. But again you guys have more insight and
understanding. so whichever approach you guys decide, I am ready to
work on it! ;-)

Thanks,
Parin.