<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Efficient dual caching of dynamic web content</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mansjonasson.se/2008/02/11/efficient-dual-caching-of-dynamic-web-content/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mansjonasson.se/2008/02/11/efficient-dual-caching-of-dynamic-web-content/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 28 Feb 2010 07:26:57 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Måns</title>
		<link>http://mansjonasson.se/2008/02/11/efficient-dual-caching-of-dynamic-web-content/comment-page-1/#comment-2526</link>
		<dc:creator>Måns</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 17:53:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mansjonasson.se/wordpress/2008/02/11/efficient-dual-caching-of-dynamic-web-content/#comment-2526</guid>
		<description>Alexander, thank you for your comments. What you say is basically true, and in a &quot;standard&quot; forum setup, far-future expires headers are definately our friend. In my case, I have a somewhat &quot;weird&quot; forum setup, in which the order of posts is reversed, so the pages will be different pretty much every time somebody posts in the thread. 

Even so, far-future expires headers are very important for many reasons, some of which I intend to talk about in a not-so-far-future blog post. :)

/M;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Alexander, thank you for your comments. What you say is basically true, and in a &#8220;standard&#8221; forum setup, far-future expires headers are definately our friend. In my case, I have a somewhat &#8220;weird&#8221; forum setup, in which the order of posts is reversed, so the pages will be different pretty much every time somebody posts in the thread. </p>
<p>Even so, far-future expires headers are very important for many reasons, some of which I intend to talk about in a not-so-far-future blog post. :)</p>
<p>/M;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alexander Klimetschek</title>
		<link>http://mansjonasson.se/2008/02/11/efficient-dual-caching-of-dynamic-web-content/comment-page-1/#comment-2525</link>
		<dc:creator>Alexander Klimetschek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:48:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mansjonasson.se/wordpress/2008/02/11/efficient-dual-caching-of-dynamic-web-content/#comment-2525</guid>
		<description>If the forum entries / profile snippets are not changing upon profile changes (eg. new signature, number of posts written up-to-now, ...), all pages except the last one of a forum thread are fixed and will never change. Thus they can get a far-future expires header and the browser will handle it. If the cached-page loading is still much slower than with the Ajax-caching you mention, improve the overall HTML (navigation, CSS, scripts, etc.) for performance.

I once did a lot of Ajax for loading new &quot;pages&quot; faster to find out that standard website performance improvement tricks (eg. put CSS at top, script includes at the end of body,...) can be really fast as well. Note that I mean loading &quot;big content&quot; parts of the site, not those small snippets or autocompletion features for which Ajax is the only choice for better usability through speed.

See http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the forum entries / profile snippets are not changing upon profile changes (eg. new signature, number of posts written up-to-now, &#8230;), all pages except the last one of a forum thread are fixed and will never change. Thus they can get a far-future expires header and the browser will handle it. If the cached-page loading is still much slower than with the Ajax-caching you mention, improve the overall HTML (navigation, CSS, scripts, etc.) for performance.</p>
<p>I once did a lot of Ajax for loading new &#8220;pages&#8221; faster to find out that standard website performance improvement tricks (eg. put CSS at top, script includes at the end of body,&#8230;) can be really fast as well. Note that I mean loading &#8220;big content&#8221; parts of the site, not those small snippets or autocompletion features for which Ajax is the only choice for better usability through speed.</p>
<p>See <a href="http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/" rel="nofollow">http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
