httpd-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bill -Sx- Jones <sn...@mac.com>
Subject Re: relative vs absolute URL's / CPU processing overhead
Date Tue, 26 Mar 2002 06:31:35 GMT
On 3/25/02 9:07 PM, "Sivakatirswami" <katir@hindu.org> wrote:

> I am trying to set a development policy that will impact coding ...

Write it in pencil as it will likely change once you figure out what you
want to do...


> The issue is whether use of absolute URLs to reference images and other
> *.html documents  in the same public_html directory increases CPU overhead
> or not...  in terms of time taken for Apache to serve images for that page
> or serve/reference documents on the same site from links on the page.

There is no measurable impact on the server with regard to Absolute or
Relative URLs - but there could be an issue where your server slows down if
you are using mod_spel and there are thousands of similar filenames in the
directory in question.

 
> *.html page  three directory levels deep... if we use
> 
> <img src="http://www.mywebsite/images/somegif.gif" > vs
> <img src="../../../images/somegif.gif">
> 
> do 25 instances of the former slow down serving the page vs 25 instances of
> the latter?

Huh?  What's wrong with just a standard:

<img src="/images/somegif.gif">

???


> Of course, the issue of portability, being able to view the site locally
> under development on the LAN without opening connections to the ISP host
> outside the LAN where the domain actually lives etc. obviously puts relative
> URL's in the lead for preferred usage... but the overhead required to "go to
> the trouble" to figure out what directory level a document will be on when

???  Is this a first site design for you or your team?


> levels wrong where "../../image/some.gif"  should really be
> "../../../image/some.gif"

Sounds like you are not mirroring your development...  I host
http://insecurity.org/ on my laptop - then just mirror updates.

If you have multiple developers then I would suggest an internal development
host then publish the changes to the production host.


> And besides the CPU overhead question I would like any input from more
> experienced web masters on this issue... if you have "strong feelings" about
> this subject then I would like to know what they are what led you to your
> conclusions.

Well, if you must know ...

1)  get a Mac running MacOS X
2)  get BBEdit
3)  Sleep better knowing you're now 100% more effective.


BTW - CPU time will not matter after you consider where your clients are and
what technology they are using to access your site.  My point being:  Make
it easier for your clients - they will like you more if you think of them.

Cheers;
-Sx-  :]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org


Mime
View raw message