httpd-modules-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Issac Goldstand <>
Subject Re: apache module or CGI
Date Mon, 26 Mar 2007 16:02:55 GMT
I'd say then that you need to do in on-the-fly with caching.  Caching
should be pretty easy - just have a static algorithm for determining the
name of the cached image and stat it to see if it already exists.  If so
serve it; if not, reduce the image, save it and then serve.  You don't
need a separate process if we're dealing with foreground processing.


Sam Carleton wrote:
> On 3/26/07, Issac Goldstand <> wrote:
>> If the images are already on the server, and needed for the response
>> immediately, you'd need to do it inline, but you could still make life
>> easier on yourself (somewhat) by caching the reduced images to avoid
>> reprocessing.
>> I could give more specific advice if you could share a bit more about
>> what you're trying to accomplish in general.
> Issac,
> It is beyond simple.  There are a bunch a full size image (4 MB to 16
> MB) on the web server that need to be indexed (210x140 size) on the
> browser, when the user clicks on a thumbnail, they need to get a
> larger (900x600 size) image to view.  They are getting any where from
> 12 to 96 of the indexed images per page.
> Like I said above, I fully understand the importance of caching the
> results.  Rather then trying to write the code myself and save the
> images myself, I am using a second instance of apache running as a
> reverse proxy to cache the results;)  Why reinvent the wheel;)
> On thought I had was this:
> When the server gets the request for the image, if it does need to
> downsize it, add it to a queue and simply make the system wait for the
> response.  I would actually have to create some type of pool of
> processes so that things don't get too back logged.  I am thinking
> maybe based on IP address or something so that there is only one
> downsizing per browser.  The only issue I have there is what happens
> if two browsers request the same image, I am sure there is a way that
> once the image is downsized once, it could be sent to both browsers,
> but this is starting to get really complex.  I am really looking for
> simplicity.  Speed is important, but this is really only a very small
> piece of what I am doing.
> Right now, the worst and very much extreme case is 100 viewing
> stations (browsers) having access.  Normal is going to be between 4
> and 20 viewing stations.
> Sam

View raw message