httpd-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Crane <>
Subject RE: [users@httpd] *.shtml or *.html
Date Thu, 12 Feb 2004 13:15:09 GMT


Thank you, you've answered my question. Actually, I
will be using SSI on every page so as you said
changing the config file to allow .html instead of
.shtml would be a lot better, unless I started
designing with a *.shtml extension and that way, if I
needed any pages not to be parsed (there could be
some) I could just use the normal *.html

In terms of overhead, is it really a threat to speed
as websites get bigger (I mean this one will never
grow in excess of a 100 pages) or is that more of an
urban legend...I've tried the SSI on my pages, in
fact, my demo loads a fairly complex webpage into a
webpage and it seems to not represent too much of an

Is there anywhere on the web that you can test what
affect parsed pages have on bandwidth and display as
opposed to non-parsed pages?


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.

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