Stuart Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org> wrote: > In some ways it would be better if it *did* compress on the fly, as then > you don't have so much to consider with the effect on block/match rules, > whether a request is passed to a fastcgi handler, etc. (But of course > then you have CPU use issues).
I don't want my webservers to perform unexpected compute. Sending extra packets is cheaper than doing the compute. > Not sure if it's still actually needed, but most web servers with gzip > support usually have a way to disable it per user-agent due to problems > that have occurred. I was not talking about other webservers. I was talking about any other program going, "OH i see you have a .gz file, I cannot actually confirm it is a gzip of the non-gzip file, but here you go, here is the thing you didn't ask for". Nothing ever went wrong with that approach, right? > Some of the webservers do, for language selection etc. Sometimes it's > useful. Fortunately there are various options for more fully featured > web servers if people need that, if I understand correctly the whole > point of httpd was that it doesn't have many features. Oh, httpd was written for only that reason? That's incorrect.
