>>I'm running on a 1.5mb download/256kb upload cable connection. > >Is that the advertised rate, or the measured rate?
Yes. :-) It's how it's advertised, and I ran a couple online bandwidth tests to check it. >Are you just serving static content? What about the POSTs? The content will be updated 6-12 times an hour, so it's not truly static. >Also, are you using apr? IF you are serving static content, apr should >help a lot (but maybe not if you're planning on caching them in memory). >Not sure if a memory cache is going to buy you that much. Sorry, I'm not sure what "apr" is (besides April, American Public Radio, etc). Yes, even with plain OS file caching, I'm not sure if the memory cache will buy me much initially. I don't think I'm going to know until I get to a point where my code can realistically test the difference. It's possible that the amount of data could significantly increase such that I can still viably keep it in memory, but the OS may not cache that many small files. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Load-testing%2C-benchmarking%2C-and-tuning-tf4229615.html#a12036101 Sent from the Tomcat - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
