Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 23:04:07 +0200 From: Anders Nordby <anders@FreeBSD.org> To: "Mikhail T." <mi+thun@aldan.algebra.com> Cc: apache@FreeBSD.org, net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Is it worth the effort to make proxy and server communicate via Unix socket? Message-ID: <20121001210407.GA10881@fupp.net> In-Reply-To: <5069C3B3.9050500@aldan.algebra.com> References: <5069C3B3.9050500@aldan.algebra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, On man, okt 01, 2012 at 12:24:19pm -0400, Mikhail T. wrote: > In a fairly common setup today, a proxy (say, Varnish) runs on the same > system as the actual "backend" server (such as Apache). > > Would it be worthwhile to alter them both to allow them to talk via a > socket instead of via TCP (on the lo0 interface)? > > Or is the win just too negligible? Thanks! I don't see the point. Varnish usually runs on separate servers. On a small scale setup, the likely improvements would be negligible. The Varnish developers also do not want Varnish to become a web server, it's just not it's job. Your time is better spent improving your cache hit ratio (% of requests cached) as well as integrating purging with your content management systems when caching dynamic pages. If you are serving flat files only you may want to consider just using lighttpd or nginx, which are known to be fast. Regards, -- Anders.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20121001210407.GA10881>