[Rabbit-proxy-users] RE: Image Compression Choices

[Samuel H. <Sam...@Co...>]

We are talking dial-up.
2000 seems cool, maybe even a bit bigger like 8,000-12,000.
I may set that higher myself because the concept makes perfect sense.

Sam
 


-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Olofsson [mailto:ro...@kh...] 
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 10:44 AM
To: Samuel Hill
Subject: Re: [Rabbit-proxy-users] Memory/Proxy problems


Samuel Hill wrote:

>Well I turned the cache back on.
>I set it to 2 gigs and we will see what happens.
>
>I did notice, and this is an old and different problem, that some 
>images are not being compressed, and I do not see why.
>  
>
There are three common cases where rabbit will not convert images:

1) Rabbit will download it and see that it is less than 2000 bytes and
that means that it is to small. So rabbit will let it be. (The redhat
logo 
falls into this category)

2) When converting images rabbit will send the smallest image. Some 
images get
bigger when converted to jpegs and in thoose cases rabbit will serve the

original.

3) There are also some sites that send odd content types for images and 
rabbit will
not know what to do with them.

Case 3 is not very common for what I know, but it depends on the
users...

qvc is probably a mixed case of 2 and 3 (as far as I can see by looking 
at the first page).

Why?
case 1: converting images introduces latencies and we want them to be 
small.
case2: sending more bytes is dumb! If the image also has lower quality 
we are being double dumb!!

The number 2000 was selected a long time ago, maybe it ought to be 
changed, but I think it is quite ok.
Maybe it ought to be a little bigger (to fit nicely into 2
tcp-packages).

/robo