httpd-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jacob Coby" <>
Subject Re: [users@httpd] file sizes....
Date Mon, 25 Nov 2002 15:42:45 GMT
> I do see your point about type of file though. it is to be expected that
> an image will be quite a bit larger in general than an html / text file.
> though, if you look at php nuke you will see some that are close to 100
> k in the php files for it. ( at least in version 4, which was last one I
> looked at in detail )

100k in source is nothing.  We have more than that in cron jobs :)

It really depends on the context as to what is a 'large' file.  To the OS, a
large file is one bigger than 32 bits (2^32), requiring a 64-bit fs.  To a
web user running on 56k, a 120k html page is large, taking several seconds
to see.  To the same user on a high-speed line, 1200k becomes large.

To your average user, bytes, kilobytes, megabytes, gigabytes, and transfer
rates don't mean diddly squat.  They know that this site takes 10 sec to
view and that this other site takes 5 seconds to view.  Most of the time
another site may take 2 seconds, but today it is taking 5.

So I propose this definition, in the context of web services: a big file is
one that takes 5-10 seconds to view.  A large file takes 11-90 seconds, and
a huge file takes 91+ seconds.  You can also define them as a big file is
'fairly quick', a large file takes 'a while', and a huge file takes
'forever' to download.


The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
   "   from the digest:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message