fud.theturtle at gmail.com
Mon Mar 30 08:11:14 MSD 2009
I agree. I have worked on machines serving several hundred gallery sites. We ran into memory limits with apache well before seeing any io wait issues. Although separating out your dynamic content servers from your static is never a bad idea. I guess a dedicated static cache would be one way of accomplishing that.
From: Cliff Wells <cliff at develix.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2009 11:29 PM
To: nginx at sysoev.ru
Subject: Re: varnish?
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 19:00 -0400, Ilan Berkner wrote:
> I just came across varnish. We serve a lot of MP3 files on a regular
> basis. Does it make sense to have Varnish cache those and serve them
> out of cache? Does anyone have any experience with Varnish and Nginx
> installs? Are they complimentary or exclusionary?
They are complimentary. That being said, I don't think it makes much
sense to cache static files with an application. Your OS kernel
already caches disk accesses and running another application will cut
into that cache memory. Varnish makes more sense for dynamic content.
More information about the nginx