Re: Features

From: Gregory Maxwell <>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 08:51:25 -0500 (EST)

Disk space = Cheap
Cpu = Cheap
Ram = Cheap
Bandwidth = Very expensive to WOW thats quite very expensive.

Some people could prob use disk compression... Most dont need it..
Almost everyone could use Intercache compression..

I'd also like to add: It would be nice if savvy browsers could also make
compressed connections..

On Mon, 24 Nov 1997, Umar Goldeli wrote:

> Err... decompressed for transmission?
> It would be better to compress for transmission and store uncompressed (or
> even compressed).. basically the important bit is to save on bandwidth..
> after all - regardless of the CPU hit, it's *much* cheaper to get more RAM
> and CPU in the long run..
> --Umar
> > ZLIB is the obvious thing to use. At it's simplest, a cache item could be compressed
> > before storage, and decompressed for transmission.
Received on Mon Nov 24 1997 - 06:17:20 MST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:37:43 MST