From: Christian Kuhtz [mailto:ck () arch bellsouth net]
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 12:14 PM
To: nanog () merit edu
Subject: Re: decreased caching efficiency?
On Fri, Oct 20, 2000 at 11:59:58AM -0700, Travis Grant wrote:
Commerce sites are also dependent on dynamic technology
that cannot be
cached. Although you will find sites that are entirely
static (buy.com &
etoys.com) you will generally find that these models are
based on volume and
that the majority of these sites have never seen a dollar
in profit. However
the profitable boutique type sites like eStyle.com, are
Margins are protected by a contractual product line. When
you place an
order, a query verifies inventory prior to final checkout.
product pages indicate whether items are in stock or not.
You cant cache
these types of sites.
Each and every button, product image etc could be cached,
regardless of the
dynamic nature of the website. Images cost cycles, bw.
Most caching implementations will cost way more than the
You get no argument there ;-). I never felt that you could
caching in terms of bandwidth savings. You can only justify
in terms of
improving a users experience. And in that sense, you are
resources to a content origin, and a free service to them.
That's why the CDN strategy is much more attractive, where
you have a hosting
relationship of some kind with the content origin.
load on the DB servers. But TTLs will usually have to be
set pretty low (2
seconds) in order to do this and the technologies will have
to be catered to
web development environments (like cacheflow and ASP).
Hmm, if you cache what I suggest above, that's not really
<ck () arch bellsouth net> -wk, <ck () gnu org> -hm
for myself only."