X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (wm.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AC829FD158 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2006 16:18:00 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 57615-09 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2006 19:17:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from lists.commandprompt.com (host-130.commandprompt.net [207.173.203.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46E729FD153 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2006 16:17:47 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [192.168.1.50] (or-67-76-146-141.sta.embarqhsd.net [67.76.146.141]) (authenticated bits=0) by lists.commandprompt.com (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k7SJHk69013918 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 28 Aug 2006 12:17:47 -0700 Message-ID: <44F34160.8090509@commandprompt.com> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 12:17:52 -0700 From: "Joshua D. Drake" Organization: Command Prompt, Inc. User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Lane CC: Magnus Hagander , Naz Gassiep , pgsql-www@postgresql.org Subject: Re: PostgreSQL web site References: <6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCEA0FB7D@algol.sollentuna.se> <15501.1156790439@sss.pgh.pa.us> In-Reply-To: <15501.1156790439@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.88.3, clamav-milter version 0.88.3 on projects.commandprompt.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Greylist: Sender succeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.6 (lists.commandprompt.com [192.168.2.159]); Mon, 28 Aug 2006 12:17:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.135 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200608/126 X-Sequence-Number: 10517 Tom Lane wrote: > "Magnus Hagander" writes: >>> Actually that is a very good question... why are we not using >>> mod_deflate? > >> Good question. It's definitly worth investigating. > > What are we talking about here --- some hack to make users' web browsers > decompress pages on-the-fly? No it is not a hack. With HTTP1.1 browers have the ability to compress and decompress on the fly. This is done in the negotiation between > How much does that slow down the browsing > experience, if you've got an old slow PC? Well good question. How slow are we talking? If we are talking a AMD 300 people are likely not using broadband and it wouldn't matter anyway because either way they are use to slow. > (I can believe that if you've > got a fast PC and a slow internet connection, it could make things > faster overall ... but the breakeven point is not obvious.) What are > the odds that people using older browsers will be locked out entirely? None. Because it will fall back to 1.0 if your browser doesn't support it. The browser will negotiate with the web server to determine the best route to retrieve the data. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > regards, tom lane > -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/