Search Results

Search found 31417 results on 1257 pages for 'site structure'.

Page 358/1257 | < Previous Page | 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365  | Next Page >

  • What are the hard and fast rules for Cache Control?

    - by Metalshark
    Confession: sites I maintain have different rules for Cache Control mostly based on the default configuration of the server followed up with recommendations from the Page Speed & Y-Slow Firefox plug-ins and the Network Resources view in Google's Speed Tracer. Cache-Control is set to private/public depending on what they say to do, ETag's/Last-Modified headers are only tinkered with if Y-Slow suggests there is something wrong and Vary-Accept-Encoding seems necessary when manually gziping files for Amazon CloudFront. When reading through the material on the different options and what they do there seems to be conflicting information, rules for broken proxies and cargo cult configurations. Any of the official information provided by the analysis tools mentioned above is quite inaccessible as it deals with each topic individually instead of as a unified strategy (so there is no cross-referencing of techniques). For example, it seems to make no sense that the speed analysis tools rate a site with ETag's the same as a site without them if they are meant to help with caching. What are the hard and fast rules for a platform agnostic Cache Control strategy? EDIT: A link through Jeff Atwood's article explains Caching in superb depth. For the record though here are the hard and fast rules: If the file is Compressed using GZIP, etc - use "cache-control: private" as a proxy may return the compressed version to a client that does not support it (the browser cache will hold files marked this way though). Also remember to include a "Vary: Accept-Encoding" to say that it is compressible. Use Last-Modified in conjunction with ETag - belt and braces usage provides both validators, whilst ETag is based on file contents instead of modification time alone, using both covers all bases. NOTE: AOL's PageTest has a carte blanche approach against ETags for some reason. If you are using Apache on more than one server to host the same content then remove the implicitly declared inode from ETags by excluding it from the FileETag directive (i.e. "FileETag MTime Size") unless you are genuinely using the same live filesystem. Use "cache-control: public" wherever you can - this means that proxy servers (and the browser cache) will return your content even if the rest of the page needs HTTP authentication, etc.

    Read the article

  • multiple domains, one static IP address and latency

    - by shirish
    how is latency affected when multiple domains are using one single static IP address ? The scenario is in shared web-hosting By latency meaning the DNS lookup the client has to do. As far as I understand it, the browser would hit the root servers to try to figure out the IP Address and it belongs where and then when it comes to the correct server, it probably looks up some sort of table to determine which site names much and show that site as such via browser to the user. Is my understanding correct or backwards or what ?

    Read the article

  • is it written in flex? the steam client application

    - by Jayapal Chandran
    Hi, I was about to download the PC Game Mafia II ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mafia_II ). The site said that do i have steam and i said no ... it asked whether to download and i gave yes. After downloading a 1.5mb exe it executed, dowloaded and installed additional files. After that the program opened. It gave me a feeling that that could have written in flex. if some body could clear this then that could be nice... besides, i went to the mafia ii official site to download the demo and again it asked whether i have steam installed and i said yes. then the firefox application launch dialog box appeared. and again i had this question how to launch an application using firefox... ?? may be i should ask this as a separate question but since it is associated with the above question i asked it here...

    Read the article

  • Good maintained privacy Add-On/settings set that takes usability into account?

    - by Foo Bar
    For some weeks I've been trying to find a good set of Firefox Addons that give me a good portion of privacy/security without losing to much of usability. But I can't seem to find a nice combination of add-ons/settings that I'm happy with. Here's what I tried, together with the pros and cons that I discovered: HTTPS Everywhere: Has only pro's: just install and be happy (no interaction needed), loads known pages SLL-encrypted, is updated fairly often NoScript - Fine, but needs a lot of fine-tuning, often maintained, mainly blocks all non-HTML/CSS Content, but the author sometimes seems to do "untrustworthy" decission RequestPolicy - seems dead (last activity 6 months ago, has some annoying bugs, official support mail address is dead), but the purpose of this is really great: gives you full control over cross-site requests: blocks by default, let's you add sites to a whitelist, once this is done it works interaction-less in the background AdBlock Edge: blocks specific cross-site requests from a pre-defined whitelist (can never be fully sure, need to trust others) Disconnect: like AdBlock Edge, just looking different, has no interaction possibilities (can never be fully sure, need to trust others, can not interact even if I wanted to) Firefox own Cookie Managment (block by default, whitelist specific sites), after building own whitelist it does it's work in the background and I have full control All These addons together basically block everything unsecure. But there are a lot of redundancies: NoScript has a mixed-content blocker, but FF has it's own for a while now. Also the Cookie blocker from NoScript is reduntant to my FF-Cookie setting. NoScript also has an XSS-blocker, which is redundant to RequestPolicy. Disconnect and AdBlock are extremly redundant, but not fully. And there are some bugs (especially RequestPolicy). And RequestPolicy seems to be dead. All in all, this list is great but has these heavy drawbacks. My favourite set would be "NoScript Light" (only script blocking, without all the additonal redundant-to-other-addons hick-hack it does) + HTTPS Everywhere + RequestPolicy-clone (maintained, less buggy), because RequestPolicy makes all other "site-blockers" obsolete (because it blocks everything by default and let's me create a whitelist). But since RequestPolicy is buggy and seems to be dead I have to fallback to AdBlock Edge and Disconnect, which don't block all and and need more maintaining (whitelist updates, trust-check). Are there addons that fulfill my wishes?

    Read the article

  • How Orchard works

    - by Latest Microsoft Blogs
    I just finished writing a long documentation topic on the Orchard project wiki that aims at being a good starting point for developers who want to understand the architecture, structure and general philosophy behind the Orchard CMS. It is not required Read More......(read more)

    Read the article

  • How to share files between cPanel accounts?

    - by Darren
    I am setting up a multi-site/multi-store Magento installation, and I want each site to have its own cPanel account so I can setup the SSL and dedicated IP properly. I have tried to create a linux group called 'magento' and changed the files I need to share to that group (even added the users to that group), however when I try to access files through my scripts on those accounts it doesn't acknowledge the files exist. I first made a soft symbolic link which didn't work and then including them to their real location but it didn't work. Am I missing a step in allowing which users can access which files? I added the users to the magento group and like I said changed the group of the files I need to share to them but it's still not working. Thanks, Darren

    Read the article

  • A simple Volume Replication Tool for large data set?

    - by Jin
    I'm looking for a solution to the following: Server A (Site A) - Win 2008 R2 - approx 10TB (15TB max) of data - well over 8 million files Server B (Site B) - Win 2008 R2 I want to assynchronously replicate Server A's volume to a volume on Server B for data redundancy. Something that I can say to my users, "go here for data" when/if Server A goes belly up due to machine problems, disaster, etc. Windows 2008 R2 does have DFS, but microsoft does not apparently support this large of a dataset (or more accurately, more than 8 million files - according to the docs I could find). I also looked at Veritas Volume Replication, but this seems almost too much as I would also require Veritas Volume Manager. There are numerous "back-up" software which makes a 1-1 backup, which would be ok, but since it will be transfering over internet, I'd like something that has compression during transfer like DFS has. Does anyone have any suggestions regarding this?

    Read the article

  • Accessing internal server eg 192.168.10.10 without using remote desktop

    - by bergin
    Hi there My boss has an intranet he wants his employees to gain access to from the WWW. Theres a sharepoint server running on 192.168.10.10 and SBS can be seen from a website 81.244.232.22 (some numbers like this). When you access, theres a default internal sharepoint site "companyweb" but we dont want to use that we want the main sharepoint site which has all the business on it. is this possible? Currently we have to connect to a computer, chose the server and then get in that way. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Accessing internal server eg 192.168.10.10 without using remote desktop

    - by bergin
    Hi there My boss has an intranet he wants his employees to gain access to from the WWW. Theres a sharepoint server running on 192.168.10.10 and SBS can be seen from a website 81.244.232.22 (some numbers like this). When you access, theres a default internal sharepoint site "companyweb" but we dont want to use that we want the main sharepoint site which has all the business on it. is this possible? Currently we have to connect to a computer, chose the server and then get in that way. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • The concept of virtual host and DNS [migrated]

    - by Subhransu
    I have a dedicated server and a mydomain.com (bought from a hosting company). I want to host a website from my dedicated server with the domain mydomain.com i.e. when I enter mydomain.com from browser it should point to the IP(let's say X.X.X.X) of dedicated server(and a particular folder inside it). I have some following queries: In Server I know I need to edit some of the files (like: host or hostname file) in the server but I do not know what exact file I need to edit. How to add a Site enable or Site available in apache2 ? In Hosting Company control Panel Which records to add (A or cname or anyother)? Where Should I add DNS(in dedicated server section or domain name section)? How it is going to affect the behaviour of the domain? in short the question is: How the virtual host works & how to add DNS?

    Read the article

  • Out Of Memory Error - Magento

    - by robobobobo
    Ok normally I understand when my server is giving me out of memory errors, but this one has me stumped! I'm running a magento based site, with one or two plugins in it and the rest is pretty basic. The site runs and loads fine wiht no issues. However in the backend - Configuration - Payment Methods it gives me the following out of memory error Fatal error: Out of memory (allocated 39059456) (tried to allocate 85 bytes) in ########/Varien/Simplexml/Element.php on line 84 Now this is where I'm confused..it's allocated more than it tried to allocate? Am I correct there? So how is it running out of memory? My server has 6Gb ram, an SSD and 2 CPU's running WHM with a few other low traffic sites on it. I set my php memory limit to 100mb, 1000mb and finally unlimited but all to no avail! I'm completely lost here, would really appreciate some expertise on this Cheers

    Read the article

  • which server is best for me??

    - by mathew
    I am looking for a best hosting service for my website. My website is a PHP MySQl driven site which hase got site scrapping for more than 10 websites and near about 8-10 API pursing and some about 150 mb dat file reading(from local hard drive), and also one rss pursing,Live graph from other sites, geo map from Google,Map api from Google and so on. one widget which real-time result for any one who chose the same. so my question is which is best option for me. actually I am considering softlayer cloud as they are pretty cheap and more facilities than rackspace. another option is a dedicated server which has 2 single core processor, 4GB ram and 250GB sata II. with 100 mbps uplink. so please tell me which will be the best option?? I heard that dedicated server has lots of limitations than cloud. but for cloud they uses SAN for storage so I am afraid the reading proces for database may be bit slower...and their basic plan ram is only 1 GB.

    Read the article

  • Windows 2008 IIS 7.0 HTTP to HTTPS Redirect -- Versus IIS 6.0 Mechanism

    - by Dan7el
    This topic, creating a mechanism for redirection from HTTP to HTTPS on a Windows 2008 server running IIS 7.0 is a much written-about topic on the Internet. How this is done is really not so much my issue. My issue is more of explaining why this can't be done with the standard HTTP Redirect module that ships with Windows 2008 IIS 7.0. Instead, there are other methods needed that are more arduous. First, the IIS 6.0 method requires no externally available modules nor does it require any additional modifications to the web.config or any type of other development effort. It's outlined here: http://blogs.microsoft.co.il/blogs/dorr/archive/2009/01/13/how-to-force-redirection-from-http-to-https-on-iis-6-0.aspx And, you can see the basic steps are to run the snap-in, get the properties on the site, and do some modifications. Presto, you have the HTTP -- HTTP redirect setup. Now, on the IIS 7.0 platform, it doesn't seem this simple. An initial search found the following site: http://www.sslshopper.com/iis7-redirect-http-to-https.html Which has two separate approcates: 1. Involves installing a separately available Microsoft module -- URL Rewrite Module, and then adding XML to the web.config. 2. Custom Error Page. ...there might be other methods, but these are the basic ones and the first is listed as the primary method. But wait...There exists on the IIS 7.0 an HTTP Redirect Module. So...why can't I use the HTTP Redirect Module to do this very thing? This is really my big question. I need to know this because my management is going to insist I use the HTTP Redirect Module and set up the HTTP to HTTPS redirect in a similar fashion to how we do in IIS 6.0. Can someone please explain to me, in clean, simple, easy to understand, terms that both I and my management can understand as to why I need to go get the URL Rewrite Module and install that on the server and make the web.config changes suggested by the article instead of simply using the HTTP Redirect module that's already installed on the site? Thanks a bunch.

    Read the article

  • Domain changes required for SSL integration

    - by user131003
    Currently my site supports regular payment options (User is taken to Payment Gateway/PG website). Now I'm trying to implement "seamless" PG integration. I need SSL for this. I'm having a dedicated server with 5 static IPs from Hostgator/HG. options: I take SSL for www.my_domain.com. According to HG, I need to change IP of main site as current IP is not really dedicated as it is being shared by cpanel etc. So They need to bind another dedicated IP to main domain for SSL to work. This would required DNS change for main website and hence cause few hours downtime (which is ok). I've noticed that most of the e-commerce websites are using subdomains like secure.my_domain.com for ssl/https. This sounds like a better approach. But I've got few doubts in this case: a) Would I need to re-register with existing PGs (Paypal, Google Checkout, Authorize.net) if I switch to subdomain? Re-registering is not an option for me. b) Would DNS change be required for www.my_domain.com in this case. This confusion arose because of following reply from HG : "If the sub domain secure.my_domain.com is added to an existing cPanel it will use the IP for that cPanel so as long as it is a Dedicated IP that will be fine. If secure.my_domain.com gets setup as its own cPanel it will need to be assigned to a Dedicated IP which would have a DNS change involved.". Please suggest?

    Read the article

  • Internet Dropping?!

    - by stead1984
    I have a virtual DC running DNS and Routing and Remote Access, that routes ALL workstations Internet traffic out to the Internet, this works fine but noticed that the Internet drops occasionally. I've checked with our service provider (Managed Communications) and they are adamant that it's not their fault. The Internet drops seem to affect everyone. We also have a server configured to use the same Internet service on a different network over a site-to-site VPN connection which also suffers from packet drops. I've spoken to Cisco and have done many tests with Cisco and they believe the problem is down to the ISP. I'm wondering if it's a DNS issue, as the Internet service uses OpenDNS. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • CA and VPN setup

    - by Raj
    We are a small comany about 20 employees. We have some off site some i houser servers. Where should I install CA? On a domain controller or VM? can I obtain my own certificate for MS VPN? Where should I install MS vpn server? can I install on VM CA server? Do I need to open any ports on Firewall? Please send me or direct me to a web site where I can get setip by step installation instructions. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Refactoring and Open / Closed principle

    - by Giorgio
    I have recently being reading a web site about clean code development (I do not put a link here because it is not in English). One of the principles advertised by this site is the Open Closed Principle: each software component should be open for extension and closed for modification. E.g., when we have implemented and tested a class, we should only modify it to fix bugs or to add new functionality (e.g. new methods that do not influence the existing ones). The existing functionality and implementation should not be changed. I normally apply this principle by defining an interface I and a corresponding implementation class A. When class A has become stable (implemented and tested), I normally do not modify it too much (possibly, not at all), i.e. If new requirements arrive (e.g. performance, or a totally new implementation of the interface) that require big changes to the code, I write a new implementation B, and keep using A as long as B is not mature. When B is mature, all that is needed is to change how I is instantiated. If the new requirements suggest a change to the interface as well, I define a new interface I' and a new implementation A'. So I, A are frozen and remain the implementation for the production system as long as I' and A' are not stable enough to replace them. So, in view of these observation, I was a bit surprised that the web page then suggested the use of complex refactorings, "... because it is not possible to write code directly in its final form." Isn't there a contradiction / conflict between enforcing the Open / Closed Principle and suggesting the use of complex refactorings as a best practice? Or the idea here is that one can use complex refactorings during the development of a class A, but when that class has been tested successfully it should be frozen?

    Read the article

  • Wordpress .htaccess preventing subfolder access

    - by John K.
    This is sort of a goofy setup, but it's not in my power to reconfigure it at this time. I'm running in a shared hosting environment. The domain is example.com. This is an add-on domain on the host side with example.com being redirected to the www/example.com sub-directory. That directory houses a standard Wordpress site which acts as the main site when you visit example.com. The .htaccess file within that directory is: # BEGIN WordPress <IfModule mod_rewrite.c> RewriteEngine On RewriteBase / RewriteRule ^index\.php$ - [L] RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d RewriteRule . /index.php [L] </IfModule> # END WordPress <IfModule mod_rewrite.c> RewriteEngine On RewriteRule ^wp-admin/profile\.php$ /ssm/welcome [R] </IfModule> I have a subdirectory, at the root level with the /example.com subdirectory that houses a cake php application. That subdirectory is /tracker. My problem is that when I attempt to browse to example.com/tracker, I get a 404 from Wordpress because perma links are on. What I think I need is a rewrite rule in the Wordpress .htaccess file that short circuits the existing rewrite rules and permits example.com/tracker to work independently of the Wordpress install. Or a rewrite rule at the root level that short circuits the redirect to the /example.com directory in the first place. Not sure how well I explained that so here's a summary. The www/ directory structure: example.com/ tracker/ Add on domain of www.example.com redirecting to the /example.com directory with Wordpress and a tracker/ directory running CakePHP which I would like to access via www.example.com/tracker. If you need further info or clarification let me know!

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to transfer a domain without a "gap" in Whois privacy protection?

    - by Guest
    I currently own several domains on which I am using a Whois privacy protection service to hide my personal details. In the near future, I would like to transfer some of these domains to a different registrar. It has been many years since I last performed domain transfers, so I am no longer knowledgeable about what it involves. However, I have read from several registrars that they ask their customers to disable Whois protection before effecting a domain transfer. Since there are several websites out there that publish archived versions of Whois information (and ask handsome money for the information to be hidden, of course), I would prefer to avoid having such a "gap" in my privacy protection. I figured that these websites would fetch Whois information mainly when a query is effected through their own website. However, I have found out that at least one of these sites had a copy of the Whois information for a new domain up on their site within hours after I registered it, so they must have some other source (of course I used a Google search to find that out, not their own site). What that tells me is that the time it takes for the domain transfers to go through would be more than enough for these rogue websites to cache my information. If my new registrar offers privacy protection for domains right from the point of registration as well, is there no way to transfer the domain between the two without reverting to my default Whois information in between?

    Read the article

  • Is my hard drive about to fail?

    - by Cody Harlow
    I hear some squeaking noises sometimes when I use my computer so I ran smartctl. This is the results: === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 Num Test_Description Status Remaining LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error # 1 Short offline Completed: read failure 90% 5953 37922655 # 2 Extended offline Completed: read failure 90% 5953 37922655 # 3 Short offline Completed: read failure 90% 5953 37922655 # 4 Short offline Completed without error 00% 429 - # 5 Extended offline Aborted by host 90% 429 - # 6 Short offline Completed without error 00% 429 - # 7 Short offline Completed without error 00% 429 - Is this a bad sign?

    Read the article

  • Does purposely linking to an invalid URL and then using 301 affect SEO?

    - by Mike
    On a section of my site, I am currently using .htaccess rewrites to put the ID as part of the URL instead of in the query, like so: RewriteRule ^([a-z_]+)?/?tours/([0-9]+)/(.*) /tours/tour_text.php?lang=$1&id=$2&urlstr=$3 [L] For example, if someone goes to /en/tours/12/some-text-here it will rewrite it to /tours/tour_text.php?lang=en&id=12&urlstr=some-text-here. However I don't want the users to be able to put just any text, so if they type in the wrong some-text-here part it will 301 redirect them to the right page. This works perfectly, but I can see a potential problem potential arising when localizing the website, so I just wanted to make sure it's not actually a problem. How it is now, if someone goes to /en/tours/12/some-text-here, the anchor to the Spanish version of that page will be /es/tours/12/some-text-here (i.e. only changing the "en" to "es"), and then the script will then 301 them to the correct Spanish text (something like /es/tours/12/algun-texto-aqui). And the reverse will also be the same. The anchor on the Spanish version to the English version would be /en/tours/12/algun-texto-aqui and then they will be forwarded with 301 back to /en/tours/12/some-text-here. Basically, the anchor changes the language and the 301 changes the string at the end. So I have two questions: Does purposely and permanently having invalid URLs on your site that get 301'ed to the correct ones have any effect on SEO? I could make it just show the correct URL to begin with, but this is a significant amount of work due to how I am handling the translations, so I would prefer just to 301 them. Will the invalid URLs that are contained in the links be added to the search engine indexes even if they get 301'ed to another page?

    Read the article

  • Marshalling C# Structs into DX11 cbuffers

    - by Craig
    I'm having some issues with the packing of my structure in C# and passing them through to cbuffers I have registered in HLSL. When I pack my struct in one manner the information seems to be able to pass to the shader: [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Explicit, Size = 16)] internal struct TestStruct { [FieldOffset(0)] public Vector3 mEyePosition; [FieldOffset(12)] public int type; } This works perfectly when used against this HLSL fragment: cbuffer PerFrame : register(b0) { Vector3 eyePos; int type; } float3 GetColour() { float3 returnColour = float(0.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f); switch(type) { case 0: returnColour = float3(1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f); break; case 1: returnColour = float3(0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f); break; case 2: returnColour = float3(0.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f); break; } return returnColour; } However, when I use the following structure definitions... // Note this is 16 because HLSL packs in 4 float 'chunks'. // It is also simplified, but still demonstrates the problem. [StructLayout(Layout.Explicit, Size = 16)] internal struct InternalTestStruct { [FieldOffset(0)] public int type; } [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Explicit, Size = 32)] internal struct TestStruct { [FieldOffset(0)] public Vector3 mEyePosition; //Missing 4 bytes here for correct packing. [FieldOffset(16)] public InternalTestStruct mInternal; } ... the following HLSL fragment no longer works. struct InternalType { int type; } cbuffer PerFrame : register(b0) { Vector3 eyePos; InternalType internalStruct; } float3 GetColour() { float3 returnColour = float(0.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f); switch(internaltype.type) { case 0: returnColour = float3(1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f); break; case 1: returnColour = float3(0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f); break; case 2: returnColour = float3(0.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f); break; } return returnColour; } Is there a problem with the way I am packing the struct, or is it another issue? To re-iterate: I can pass a struct in a cbuffer so long as it does not contain a nested struct.

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to set Transmission to show list of files as collapsed by default?

    - by Rasmus
    When downloading a torrent with a large folder hierarchy, I often find myself losing overview of the content of the torrent as Transmission shows the entire folder structure expanded under Properties > Files. Most annoyingly, if one collapses the tree and closes the dialog, the tree will be expanded again if one re-access it. Is it somehow possible to set Transmission to show torrent content as collapsed by default?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365  | Next Page >