On Fri, Nov 24, 2000 at 05:03:10PM +0000, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * James A. Treacy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20001124 10:35]: > > Also, we were contemplating switching to dynamic pages. > > I don't know if this is a good idea performance wise. > There is no question that static pages are more efficient. The question is whether we can provide dynamic pages with the resources we have. Frankly, I don't have a lot of experience with dynamic pages, but I suspect it shouldn't be a problem. Note that we are only contemplating the use. No decision has been made.
> > Since the content is updated daily static pages don't make a lot of > > sense. > > Why? Disk space doesn't matter, but performance does. Current disk space for packages.d.o: 75MB multiply by 10 ports: 750MB multiply by 1.5 for the times the dist is frozen: over 1.1GB We should be able to pack the information needed into about 1/10 that size in a db. Note that this assumes a seperate page for each port. Whether a seperate page, or one page is better is something that needs to be disussed. For a single page: - you save a lot of space. For individual pages: - Much simpler pages. The user isn't overloaded with info on 10 ports. - There can be significant version skew between ports. Different versions can have different dependencies, descriptions, even different licenses! The first point for using individual pages is something we may be able to work around. The second one is much more serious. -- James (Jay) Treacy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
