Compression Policy

[Guillaume Quintard]

You can test, but I don't think it's worth the trouble. Virtually all
clients support gzip, so you'll only really use one version of your object.

-- 
Guillaume Quintard

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 8:49 PM, Nigel Peck <np.lists at sharphosting.uk> wrote:

>
> I am looking at how best to set up compression on my setup, that is a
> Varnish server handing out cached content from a separate back-end server.
> In his notes on the subject, Poul-Henning says that there is no need to
> store both a gzipped and an un-gzipped copy of requests in the cache, since
> Varnish can gunzip on the fly.
>
> https://varnish-cache.org/docs/4.1/phk/gzip.html
>
> My question is, wouldn't it be quicker to have both a gzipped and
> ungzipped copy stored in memory, so that this does not need to be changed
> on the fly? Or is the time taken to ungzip so negligible as to make this
> unnecessary?
>
> Thanks
> Nigel
>
> _______________________________________________
> varnish-misc mailing list
> varnish-misc at varnish-cache.org
> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/pipermail/varnish-misc/attachments/20170409/e0e61067/attachment.html>