For everyone making the point about the performance hits of running these types of operations in htaccess as opposed to httpd.conf file yes I don't think anyone would argue with that, but it is true that this is for those billions of people on some type of shared hosting environment.. Besides, You can use the AllowOverride directive in httpd.conf to allow.htaccess in/z/image/ folder but not/z/df/even/cgi-b/live/ folder. Just turn it off, problem solved.
Remember the article is called "Speed Up Sites with htaccess Caching" for a specific reason, this is about htaccess.. Power to the people!:)
Just like how a lot of major servers with major processing power and bandwidth all of a sudden need to diagnose why their services aren't performing as expected. The reason in this example is because 99% of their customers were connecting to their bada$$ server every 3-7 minutes to check their email.. Only 1% of their customers were using IMAP..
So likewise this may not seem like much of a performance gain to cut a small sites bandwidth IN HALF by implementing a well-thought-out caching scheme, but when you think what it would be like if the giant web hosting providers implemented a watered-down version of this in httpd.conf, man that would be huge and would help everyone. The bandwidth savings are dramatic
As an example of how I implement this caching scheme..
<FilesMatch "\.(flv|gif|jpg|jpeg|png|ico)$"> Header set Cache-Control "max-age=2592000" # YEAR </FilesMatch> <FilesMatch "\.(js|css|pdf|swf)$"> Header set Cache-Control "max-age=604800" # WEEK </FilesMatch> <FilesMatch "\.(html|htm|txt)$"> Header set Cache-Control "max-age=600" # 10 minutes </FilesMatch>
So the js and css get cached for a week, but if I make a change to one of them my site visitors won't get the updated content!
But there is a fix for that that I use on all my sites now. Because the.html file is the file that specifies the URI for the js, css, and thereby every file on the site, I can just make a change to the html file and all site visitors update their cache!
Slashdot Mirror
nix is commonly used to referred to both Unix and Linux
For everyone making the point about the performance hits of running these types of operations in htaccess as opposed to httpd.conf file yes I don't think anyone would argue with that, but it is true that this is for those billions of people on some type of shared hosting environment.. Besides, You can use the AllowOverride directive in httpd.conf to allow .htaccess in /z/image/ folder but not /z/df/even/cgi-b/live/ folder. Just turn it off, problem solved.
:)
Remember the article is called "Speed Up Sites with htaccess Caching" for a specific reason, this is about htaccess.. Power to the people!
Just like how a lot of major servers with major processing power and bandwidth all of a sudden need to diagnose why their services aren't performing as expected. The reason in this example is because 99% of their customers were connecting to their bada$$ server every 3-7 minutes to check their email.. Only 1% of their customers were using IMAP..
So likewise this may not seem like much of a performance gain to cut a small sites bandwidth IN HALF by implementing a well-thought-out caching scheme, but when you think what it would be like if the giant web hosting providers implemented a watered-down version of this in httpd.conf, man that would be huge and would help everyone. The bandwidth savings are dramatic
Ooops.. I meant
Decrease page load times
As an example of how I implement this caching scheme..
So the js and css get cached for a week, but if I make a change to one of them my site visitors won't get the updated content!
But there is a fix for that that I use on all my sites now. .html file is the file that specifies the URI for the js, css, and thereby every file on the site, I can just make a change to the html file and all site visitors update their cache!
Because the
So when I make change I rename the css and js file to ?v1009