[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Proxy support in apache




Hi,

Let me second that. I tried using apache as a proxy server, it was ok but
nowhere as good as squid - much faster, easier to install, and has better
caching capabilities.

Since both are free, what's the point of using a tool for which caching is
an added value instead of a tool dedicated solely to caching?

Gilad.





amos@gezernet.co.il on 08/10/97 01:13:54 PM

Please respond to amos@gezernet.co.il

To:   abel@bfr.co.il
cc:   LINUX-IL@linux.org.il (bcc: Gilad Gam)
Subject:  Re: Proxy support in apache




Alexander L. Belikoff wrote:
>
> Hi everybody,
>
> I'm still running Apache 1.1.3-3 RPM, but now I get at least one good
> reason to upgrade. I need httpd with proxy support but the one I'm
> running doesn't have it compiled in.
>
> Due to some comfortable laziness and lack of spare time, I cannot play
> with different apache distributions. Therefore I've got the following
> questions:
>
> 1. Can the apache RPM in redhat contrib be trusted?
> 2. Does it have proxy support compiled in?
I wanted Apache 1.2 for that reason too (in addition to others,
of course), but under Debian.  A very good advice I got was to
simply install squid.  It is supposed to be better than apache
when proxy in concerned.  Was a snap to install (now still
in experimental stages, until we get our dedicated proxy
server up and running) and can cooperate with other squid servers
in your network neightborhood to share the cache.
Dunno if squid is available for RH, though (but will be surprised
to hear that it isn't).
Cheers,
--Amos
--
--Amos Shapira                | "Of course Australia was marked for
133/13 Shlomo Ben Yosef st.   |  glory, for its people had been chosen
Jerusalem 93 805              |  by the finest judges in England."
ISRAEL    amos@gezernet.co.il |                       -- Anonymous