Search Results

Search found 2338 results on 94 pages for 'donut caching'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 4/94 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Caching/preloading files on Linux into RAM

    - by Andrioid
    I have a rather old server that has 4GB of RAM and it is pretty much serving the same files all day, but it is doing so from the hard drive while 3GBs of RAM are "free". Anyone who has ever tried running a ram-drive can witness that It's awesome in terms of speed. The memory usage of this system is usually never higher than 1GB/4GB so I want to know if there is a way to use that extra memory for something good. Is it possible to tell the filesystem to always serve certain files out of RAM? Are there any other methods I can use to improve file reading capabilities by use of RAM? More specifically, I am not looking for a 'hack' here. I want file system calls to serve the files from RAM without needing to create a ram-drive and copy the files there manually. Or at least a script that does this for me. Possible applications here are: Web servers with static files that get read alot Application servers with large libraries Desktop computers with too much RAM Any ideas? Edit: Found this very informative: The Linux Page Cache and pdflush As Zan pointed out, the memory isn't actually free. What I mean is that it's not being used by applications and I want to control what should be cached in memory.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET, IS7 and IE8 caching?

    - by jdege
    We're suddenly having problems with some of our sites having old versions of .css and .js files show up in the browser. Generally, these problems go away, when the user clears cache in the browser. Is there something we can do either in the code or in IIS7, to convince the browser to not used the cached files? In our weirdest case, we have one customer whose users hit our site, and get an old version of a js file. They clear cache, load the page, get the current version, and the page runs fine. Then they load the file again, and suddenly have the old version, again. Any ideas as to how that might be happening? I can think of three: The browser is somehow holding on to the old version, when we clear cache, and is putting it back in the cache, before the second page load. One of our servers has an old version of the file, and while the first page load after a clear cache pulls it from one of the servers with the current version, second and subsequent page loads pull it from the server that has the old version. The first load after a clear cache goes straight to our servers, while subsequent loads pull the file from the cache on the customer's web proxy. I have to say, all three of those scenarios seem outlandishly unlikely, but it's a repeatable behavior. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Best practices for caching results of JSP pages?

    - by Spines
    My application has an MVC structure. How should I structure my application to allow for maximum caching? Is it sufficient to only cache the model objects that are passed to the JSP views? Or will there be a significant performance boost from caching the results of the rendering of the JSP views too?

    Read the article

  • HTTP caching confusion

    - by Keith
    I'm not sure whether this is a server issue, or whether I'm failing to understand how HTTP caching really works. I have an ASP MVC application running on IIS7. There's a lot of static content as part of the site including lots of CSS, Javascript and image files. For these files I want the browser to cache them for at least a day - our .css, .js, .gif and .png files rarely change. My web.config goes like this: <system.webServer> <staticContent> <clientCache cacheControlMode="UseMaxAge" cacheControlMaxAge="1.00:00:00" /> </staticContent> </system.webServer> The problem I'm getting is that the browser (tested Chrome, IE8 and FX) doesn't seem to be caching the files as I'd expect. I've got the default settings (check for newer pages automatically in IE). On first visit the content downloads as expected HTTP/1.1 200 OK Cache-Control: max-age=86400 Content-Type: image/gif Last-Modified: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 09:55:15 GMT Accept-Ranges: bytes ETag: "3efeb2294517ca1:0" Server: Microsoft-IIS/7.0 X-Powered-By: ASP.NET Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 14:29:16 GMT Content-Length: 918 <content> I think that the Cache-Control: max-age=86400 should tell the browser not to request the page again for a day. Ok, so now the page is reloaded and the browser requests the image again. This time it gets an empty response with these headers: HTTP/1.1 304 Not Modified Cache-Control: max-age=86400 Last-Modified: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 09:55:15 GMT Accept-Ranges: bytes ETag: "3efeb2294517ca1:0" Server: Microsoft-IIS/7.0 X-Powered-By: ASP.NET Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 14:30:32 GMT So it looks like the browser has sent the ETag back (as a unique id for the resource), and the server's come back with a 304 Not Modified - telling the browser that it can use the previously downloaded file. It seems to me that would be correct for many caching situations, but here I don't want the extra round trip. I don't care if the image gets out of date when the file on the server changes. There are a lot of these files (even with sprite-maps and the like) and many of our clients have very slow networks. Each round trip to ping for that 304 status is taking about a 10th to a 5th of a second. Many also have IE6 which only has 2 HTTP connections at a time. The net result is that our application appears to be very slow for these clients with every page taking an extra couple of seconds to check that the static content hasn't changed. What response header am I missing that would cause the browser to aggressively cache the files? How would I set this in a .Net web.config for IIS7? Am I misunderstanding how HTTP caching works in the first place?

    Read the article

  • Using ActiveRecord caching library in Heroku

    - by zetarun
    Hi all, I'm studying how to use caching in Heroku for my Rails app. HTTP cache powered by Varnish is superb and I'll use it in all pages without user info but I also want to use a kind of ActiveRecord caching with Memcached using "high livel" plugins such as cache_fu or cache-money...but it seems that Heroku supports only the memcached gem (http://docs.heroku.com/memcache) and it's a very low level Memcachad API... Do you have any other solutions? Thx.

    Read the article

  • LDAP user data caching on local database

    - by Eduardo
    I am integrating LDAP authentication in my web enterprise application. I would like to show listing of people name and email. Instead of querying the LDAP server for the name and email each time a listing containing several users I thought about caching the data locally in the database. Do you guys know about caching LDAP data best practices? Should I cache LDAP user data? When should I insert and refresh the data?

    Read the article

  • Preventing iframe caching in browser

    - by Zarjay
    How do you prevent Firefox and Safari from caching iframe content? I have a simple webpage with an iframe to a page on a different site. Both the outer page and the inner page have HTTP response headers to prevent caching. When I click the "back" button in the browser, the outer page works properly, but no matter what, the browser always retrieves a cache of the iframed page. IE works just fine, but Firefox and Safari are giving me trouble. My webpage looks something like this: <html> <head><!-- stuff --></head> <body> <!-- stuff --> <iframe src="webpage2.html?var=xxx" /> <!-- stuff --> </body> </html> The var variable always changes. Despite the fact that the URL of the iframe has changed (and thus, the browser should be making a new request to that page), the browser just fetches the cached content. I've examined the HTTP requests and responses going back and forth, and I noticed that even if the outer page contains <iframe src="webpage2.html?var=222" />, the browser will still fetch webpage2.html?var=111. Here's what I've tried so far: Changing iframe URL with random var value Adding Expires, Cache-Control, and Pragma headers to outer webpage Adding Expires, Cache-Control, and Pragma headers to inner webpage I'm unable to do any JavaScript tricks because I'm blocked by the same-origin policy. I'm running out of ideas. Does anyone know how to stop the browser from caching the iframed content?

    Read the article

  • Caching sitemaps in django

    - by michuk
    I implemented a simple sitemap class using django's default sitemap app. As it was taking a long time to execute, I added manual caching: class ShortReviewsSitemap(Sitemap): changefreq = "hourly" priority = 0.7 def items(self): # try to retrieve from cache result = get_cache(CACHE_SITEMAP_SHORT_REVIEWS, "sitemap_short_reviews") if result!=None: return result result = ShortReview.objects.all().order_by("-created_at") # store in cache set_cache(CACHE_SITEMAP_SHORT_REVIEWS, "sitemap_short_reviews", result) return result def lastmod(self, obj): return obj.updated_at The problem is that memcache allows only max 1MB object. This one was bigger that 1MB, so storing into cache failed: >7 SERVER_ERROR object too large for cache The problem is that django has an automated way of deciding when it should divide the sitemap file into smalled ones. According to the docs (http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/ref/contrib/sitemaps/): You should create an index file if one of your sitemaps has more than 50,000 URLs. In this case, Django will automatically paginate the sitemap, and the index will reflect that. What do you think would be the best way to enable caching sitemaps? - Hacking into django sitemaps framework to restrict a single sitemap size to, let's say, 10,000 records seems like the best idea. Why was 50,000 chosen in the first place? Google advice? random number? - Or maybe there is a way to allow memcached store bigger files? - Or perhaps onces saved, the sitemaps should be made available as static files? This would mean that instead of caching with memcached I'd have to manually store the results in the filesystem and retrieve them from there next time when the sitemap is requested (perhaps cleaning the directory daily in a cron job). All those seem very low level and I'm wondering if an obvious solution exists...

    Read the article

  • Caching issue with javascript and asp.net

    - by Ed Woodcock
    Hi guys: I asked a question a while back on here regarding caching data for a calendar/scheduling web app, and got some good responses. However, I have now decided to change my approach and stat caching the data in javascript. I am directly caching the HTML for each day's column in the calendar grid inside the $('body').data() object, which gives very fast page load times (almost unnoticable). However, problems start to arise when the user requests data that is not yet in the cache. This data is created by the server using an ajax call, so it's asynchronous, and takes about 0.2s per week's data. My current approach is simply to block for 0.5s when the user requests information from the server, and cache 4 weeks either side in the inital page load (and 1 extra week per page change request), however I doubt this is the optimal method. Does anyone have a suggestion as to how to improve the situation? To summarise: Each week takes 0.2s to retrieve from the server, asynchronously. Performance must be as close to real-time as possible. (however the data is not needed to be fully real-time: most appointments are added by the user and so we can re-cache after this) Currently 4 weeks are cached on either side of the inial week loaded: this is not enough. to cache 1 year takes ~ 21s, this is too slow for an initial load.

    Read the article

  • Client-Side caching on IIS7 doesn't seem to work

    - by thomasbtv
    I have set content caching on a specific folder by following the local web.config method. I don't think it works, and I would like to fix this. I activate the cache using the IIS / HTTP Headers / Common headers feature. I set them to 1 day of expiration. I opened a page with Google Chrome in private navigation, and then open the Network tab in the console. The first time I load the page, everything loads from the site, obviously. If I refresh the page, I see 2 types of loading in the Network console: the files from Google and Facebook and such have a status of 200, and a size of (from cache). the files from the folder for which I set the caching have a status of 304 and their size is displayed. So, I guess the caching setting doesn't work? Or does the 304 response means that it's loaded from the cache? If they aren't, how can I make it work ? Thanks !

    Read the article

  • Silverlight 4 caching issue?

    - by DavidS
    I am currently experiencing a weird caching problem it would seem. When I load my data intially, I return all the data within given dates and my graph looks as follows: Then I filter the data to return a subset of the original data for the same date range (not that it matters) and I get the following view of my data: However, I intermittently get the following when I refresh the same filterd view of the data: One can see that not all the data gets cached but only some of it i.e. for 12 Dec 2010 and 5 dec 2010(not shown here). I've looked at my queries and the correct data is getting pulled out. It is only on the presentation layer i.e. on Mainpage.xaml.cs that this erroneous data seems to exist. I've stepped through the code and the data is corect through all the layers except on the presentation layer. Has anyone experienced this before? Is there some sort of caching going in the background that is keeping that data in the background as I've got browser caching off? I am using the LoadOperation in the callback method within the Load method of the DomainContext if that helps...

    Read the article

  • At what point does caching become necessary for a web application?

    - by Zaemz
    I'm considering the architecture for a web application. It's going to be a single page application that updates itself whenever the user selects different information on several forms that are available that are on the page. I was thinking that it shouldn't be good to rely on the user's browser to correctly interpret the information and update the view, so I'll send the user's choices to the server, and then get the data, send it back to the browser, and update the view. There's a table with 10,000 or so rows in a MySQL database that's going to be accessed pretty often, like once every 5-30 seconds for each user. I'm expecting 200-300 concurrent users at one time. I've read that a well designed relational database with simple queries are nothing for a RDBMS to handle, really, but I would still like to keep things quick for the client. Should this even be a concern for me at the moment? At what point would it be helpful to start using a separate caching service like Memcached or Redis, or would it even be necessary? I know that MySQL caches popular queries and the results, would this suffice?

    Read the article

  • How can I exceed the 60% Memory Limit of IIS7 in ASP.NET Caching application

    - by evilknot
    Pardon if this is more serverfault vs. stackoverflow. It seems to be on the border. We have an application that caches a large amount of product data for an e-commerce application using ASP.NET caching. This is a dictionary object with 65K elements, and our calculations put the object's size at ~10GB. Problem: The amount of memory the object consumes seems to be far in excess of our 10GB calculation. BIGGEST CONCERN: We can't seem to use over 60% of the 32GB in the server. What we've tried so far: In machine.config/system.web (sf doesn't allow the tags, pardon the formatting): processModel autoConfig="true" memoryLimit="80" In web.config/system.web/caching/cache (sf doesn't allow the tags, pardon the formatting): privateBytesLimit = "20000000000" (and 0, the default of course) percentagePhysicalMemoryUsedLimit = "90" Environment: Windows 2008R2 x64 32GB RAM IIS7 Nothing seems to allow us to exceed the 60% value. See screenshot of taskman. http://www.freeimagehosting.net/image.php?7a42144e03.jpg

    Read the article

  • REST, caching, and authorizing with multiple user roles

    - by keithjgrant
    We have a system with multiple different levels of access--sometimes even for the same user as they switch between multiple roles. We're beginning a discussion on moving over to a RESTful implementation of things. I'm just starting to get my feet wet with the whole REST thing. So how do I go about limiting access to the correct records when they access a resource, particularly when taking caching into consideration? If user A access example.com/employees they would receive a different response than user B; user A may even receive a different response as he switches to a different role. To help facilitate caching, should the id of the role be somehow incorporated into the uri? Maybe something like example.com/employees/123 (which violates the rules of REST), or as some sort of subordinate resource like example.com/employees/role/123 (which seems silly, since role/### is going to be appended to URIs all over the place). I can help but think I'm missing something here.

    Read the article

  • How can I test caching and cache busting?

    - by Nathan Long
    In PHP, I'm trying to steal a page from the Rails playbook (see 'Using Asset Timestamps' here): By default, Rails appends assets' timestamps to all asset paths. This allows you to set a cache-expiration date for the asset far into the future, but still be able to instantly invalidate it by simply updating the file (and hence updating the timestamp, which then updates the URL as the timestamp is part of that, which in turn busts the cache). It‘s the responsibility of the web server you use to set the far-future expiration date on cache assets that you need to take advantage of this feature. Here‘s an example for Apache: # Asset Expiration ExpiresActive On <FilesMatch "\.(ico|gif|jpe?g|png|js|css)$"> ExpiresDefault "access plus 1 year" </FilesMatch> If you look at a the source for a Rails page, you'll see what they mean: the path to a stylesheet might be "/stylesheets/scaffold.css?1268228124", where the numbers at the end are the timestamp when the file was last updated. So it should work like this: The browser says 'give me this page' The server says 'here, and by the way, this stylesheet called scaffold.css?1268228124 can be cached for a year - it's not gonna change.' On reloads, the browser says 'I'm not asking for that css file, because my local copy is still good.' A month later, you edit and save the file, which changes the timestamp, which means that the file is no longer called scaffold.css?1268228124 because the numbers change. When the browser sees that, it says 'I've never seen that file! Give me a copy, please.' The cache is 'busted.' I think that's brilliant. So I wrote a function that spits out stylesheet and javascript tags with timestamps appended to the file names, and I configured Apache with the statement above. Now: how do I tell if the caching and cache busting are working? I'm checking my pages with two plugins for Firebug: Yslow and Google Page Speed. Both seem to say that my files are caching: "Add expires headers" in Yslow and "leverage browser caching" in Page Speed are both checked. But when I look at the Page Speed Activity, I see a lot of requests and waiting and no 'cache hits'. If I change my stylesheet and reload, I do see the change immediately. But I don't know if that's because the browser never cached in the first place or because the cache is busted. How can I tell?

    Read the article

  • IIS Browser caching not working

    - by Karthik
    Hi, I have enabled caching in IIS 6 for all our static images and CSS(by right clicking on those folders in IIS and enabled Content Expiration after 30 days under HTTP Headers). When I run Google PageSpeed, and look at the resources tab, the status of those images and css shows up as 200, but I was expecting a 304(not modified). When I checked Yahoo.com in Pagespeed, all its images have a 304 status. So my caching is not working? or is this how IIS content expiration works. Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Disk-based caching of dynamic images in IIS 7

    - by Daniel Schierbeck
    I'm writing an image server which needs to handle a relatively large number of concurrent requests (~5,000). The images being served are dynamically scaled down and cropped based on per-image specifications, which are queried from a database. The number of images is rather large, so an in-memory cache isn't viable (thrashing would most definitely occur). I'm using native caching in IIS 7 to avoid hitting the ASP.NET app which generates the images on-the-fly. I've looked around, but I couldn't find a simple way to configure IIS to store the cache on-disk -- is there such an option, or would I need to roll my own? I'd rather avoid placing the generated images in a public folder, so they can be served statically, since I would prefer to invalidate the cache entries using a query parameter (last-edit time from the database,) which doesn't seem possible to reconcile with static caching. I would love to get some feedback on this!

    Read the article

  • Will MySql caching cause performance problems?

    - by Camran
    I am about to upload my website onto a VPS. It is a classifieds website, where all data is stored in MySql and Solr. I wonder if when using MySql:s cache, the server will slow down? Ie, if somebody makes a search for the first time, and MySql is to cache the query, will the caching make the server slower than if it would not cache anything? After the caching is done I know things will improve in terms of performance... But I would like to know if I should even use the cache or not, what do you think? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Best method of Zend Framework caching

    - by iamthejeff
    I have a blog built using Zend Framework, which I realize might be a bit overkill for a blog alone, but I am planning on adding other features in the future. Nevertheless, I've noticed pages could be a little speedier. I've done a basic caching method that basically captures everything in index.php (Core frontend and File backend), which works great, but unfortunately it also prevents dynamic page contents from updating (messages like "this was posted 5 minutes ago", etc) until the cache period expires. So my question is what would be the best method of caching to improve performance? I am doing fairly basic queries which are mostly simple selects, not many joins or anything fancy (using Zend_Db_Table), and even on a small database page loads are a little sluggish. Is it worth it to cache queries or should I focus my time elsewhere?

    Read the article

  • How do I completely disable caching in Cakephp?

    - by James Lamiell
    So I opened the cache floodgates in my Cakephp app and now I want to close them... I've done pretty everything I can: delete all files in the tmp folder (but not the folders), turned 'Cache.disable' on in the core.php file in my app, have tried clearing the cache from within some controllers with clearCache() and Cache::clear() (but I suspect this doesn't work because it's not loading the controller -- due to caching). I've pretty much effectively halted my development process just because caching won't turn off. Anyone have some ideas that I could try? I'm starting to think it may be within the browser or maybe my hosting service, but it's probably just Cakephp messing with me.

    Read the article

  • Caching in Ruby Gem, possibly not using Rails

    - by corprew
    I am rewriting an existing Ruby Gem to include caching. This is for a gem that is relatively commonly used, and accesses a large amount of static data on a web service. Currently, I have a small number of gem users doing a large number of accesses to the service that under normal conditions would be swamping / downing the service, and we're going to put the gem up on github for general consumption. Right now, users can choose between using the rails cache mechanism, a simple disk cache, or no cache. What is best practice for letting people choose what cache to use like this (being able to use this outside of rails is a priority so i can't just bail to the underlying caching mechanism)? I'm looking for suggestions/examples for configuration and interface, especially. Thanks for your suggestions

    Read the article

  • Caching for database questions.

    - by SeanD
    When we say caching like using memcahe or Redis, is this a 1:1 caching between the user and the cache or can we cache 1 item and use it for all user? Some items like a Friend list will be 1:1 a that is unique per user. But if i want to cache the auto complete list for city lookups which can be used by any user, will it just store 1 list in the cache used by all users at same time or doe it need to store 1 list per user? Is it possible to cache the entire database, all the lookups, all the users, all their photos, etc using memache or redis? So from the above example: a friend list will be cleared from the cache when the user logs off. But something like city auto complete will stay in the cache 24-7-365, am i correct?

    Read the article

  • The case of the mysterious MySQL caching across restarts

    - by shanusmagnus
    I found a very slow MySQL query in my web app. The weird thing is that the query is only slow the first time it's executed, despite the fact that the query_cache is set to its default (query_cache_size 0) like so: mysql> show variables like 'query%'; +------------------------------+---------+ | Variable_name | Value | +------------------------------+---------+ | query_alloc_block_size | 8192 | | query_cache_limit | 1048576 | | query_cache_min_res_unit | 4096 | | query_cache_size | 0 | | query_cache_type | ON | | query_cache_wlock_invalidate | OFF | | query_prealloc_size | 8192 | +------------------------------+---------+ The even weirder thing is that this speedup persists even after the MySQL server has been stopped and restarted (I'm using OSX, and perform this restart using the system preferences pane.) The only way I can re-create the poor performance of the initial query is by rebooting the system. So my question is: how is this happening? Obviously some sort of caching at work, but where? And how does it persist across database restarts? This query is mediated through our web app, which comes via PHP/Apache, but there are no extra bells and whistles, and the curious caching also persists across Apache restarts. Help?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >