httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From toki...@aol.com
Subject Re: Fast by default
Date Tue, 01 Jun 2010 22:48:32 GMT
> web sites are loading too slow for pipes and web-server power that we have.

The key phrase there is 'that WE have'.

YOU need to tune YOUR configs to match what YOU have.
ANYONE who uses Apache can/should/must do that.
That's how that works.

The discussion at this moment is what 'default' configs should
ship with Apache. It is NOT POSSIBLE to accomodate EVERYONE.

The default httpd.conf for Apache is simply JFW ( Just Feckin Works )... 
and for a product as complicated as Apache I tend to agree with those
who think that is all that it needs to 'ship' with.

 


 Kevin Kiley


 

-----Original Message-----
From: Sergey Chernyshev <sergey.chernyshev@gmail.com>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Sent: Tue, Jun 1, 2010 5:30 pm
Subject: Re: Fast by default



It's not 'broken'.
Why change it?



Please don't think that old configurations and practices are not broken - web sites are loading
too slow for pipes and web-server power that we have.


And situation is getting worse year after year - here's analysis by Patrick Meanan of WebPageTest.org's
one year history: http://blog.patrickmeenan.com/2010/05/are-pages-getting-faster.html


            Sergey


 

Kevin Kiley

[snip]





-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org

Sent: Tue, Jun 1, 2010 7:40 am
Subject: Re: Fast by default





Geez, Eric. No wonder people don't want to contribute to httpd, when they run into an attitude
like yours. That dismissiveness makes me embarressed for our community.
There is zero reason for us to avoid putting deflate into the default configuration.
It is also very arguable that we should leave it off. I think others have argued well to enable
it by default, while you've simply dismissed them with your holier-than-thou attitude and
lack of any solid rationale.
-g

On May 31, 2010 8:06 PM, "Eric Covener" <covener@gmail.com> wrote:


On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Bryan McQuade <bmcquade@google.com> wrote:
> I propose providing an...
An additional httpd.conf doesn't sound valuable to me.  What slice of
non-savvy users would scrutinize an alternate config file, can replace
the config file of their webserver, isn't using a webserver packaged
by their OS, and wouldn't have just gotten the same information today
from the manual and 400,000 other websites?

There's currently no <ifModule> bloat in the default conf, but you're
welcome to submit a patch that adds one for deflate or expires (latter
seems more unwise to me). See the "supplemental configuration" section
of the generated config.

This doesn't address mass-vhost companies failing to allow deflate
because it's not in the no-args HTTPD ./configure , which sounds
far-fetched to me.  I can't recall a users@ or #httpd user implying
being subjected to such a thing with their own build or with cheap
hosting.

--

Eric Covener
covener@gmail.com


 




 

Mime
View raw message