Re: squid-users-digest Digest V99 #205

On 4 Jun 1999, "Allen Smith" wrote:
>On Jun 2, 7:18am, Reuben Farrelly (possibly) wrote:
>> I guess one of the more important points to note is that for many if
>> not most people, Squid is used primarily to *save* bandwidth and
>> therefore cost.
<snip>
>Certainly. That's one of the points behind the below idea - the client
>is almost certainly going to make the request anyway.
>
>> At Wednesday 2/06/99 04:32 AM -0400, Allen Smith wrote:
>> >A minor version of this that wouldn't be nearly as hard to implement
>> >(I've looked at doing it myself, although it's currently pretty far
>> >down on my ever-growing list of tasks) would be requesting and caching
>> >any cachable referred object (referred via HTTP responses, not HTML
>> >coding).

I'm not sure I follow. Prefetching should use strictly as much or more
bandwidth, never saving bandwidth. At the limit, if all clients request
all such objects, the bandwidth usage will be identical. But if any
clients don't request all objects, bandwidth will potentially have been
wasted. As far as bandwidth usage goes, it would seem to be a losing
proposition.

OTOH, I can't imagine doing such prefetching unless you have bandwidth to
burn,
Received on Fri Jun 04 1999 - 23:03:32 MDT