Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL web site
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 20:29:18 +0200
Message-ID: <6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCEA0FB7D@algol.sollentuna.se>
In-Reply-To: <44F3350F.5080501@commandprompt.com>
Thread-Topic: [pgsql-www] PostgreSQL web site
Thread-Index: AcbKz1aNzvQiPYK6ShG5sim57YI3cwAAHIAQ
From: "Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net>
To: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>,
	"Naz Gassiep" <naz@mira.net>
Cc: <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>

> > Just a suggestion, why don't the web admins turn mod_gzip on? There=20
> > are no downsides, and it would likely make a fairly large impact on=20
> > bandwidth bills. Think of all the people browsing the PG=20
> documentation=20
> > (myself included). Not only would bandwidth bills go down,=20
> > responsiveness on the docs would be higher as well.
> >=20
> > Even if there is no bandwidth saving (if your b/w is free for=20
> > instance), I'm of the opinion that mod_gzip and mod_deflate=20
> should be=20
> > used unless there is a compelling reason not to.
> >=20
> > Sorry if this has been discussed before, but I thought it was worth=20
> > mentioning on the off chance it hadn't.
>=20
> Actually that is a very good question... why are we not using=20
> mod_deflate?

Good question. It's definitly worth investigating. It does add load to
the server, but not all that much. And if we have the space (need to
check that on some of the boxen) we could set up pre-compressed static
images and that argument would go away..

//Magnus