Right or Wrong?

[Gavin Strachan]

I think the forum is very good. Like someone mentioned before like them I only go to a couple of threads as it there are a lot of sections.

[Bill Porter]

Carl
I'd certainly agree with the current 'no anonymous members' even though a nonny mouse has made some of the greatest
( and most of the worst ) contributions to Eng Lit. Basically, ecforum ain't broke so please don't fix it (except as below!)

I find the board adequately fast but there are some simple ways to increase speed and reduce server load.

eg you currently have two identical forums ( http://ecforum.org.uk/ and http://www.ecforum.org.uk/) with some browsers maintaining caches of both. (Google seems only to refer to the www version )

Also frequent verifying of files which normally never change, at the whim of browsers, takes almost as long as reloading them and adds to server load.

The following should work provided your htaccess isn't crippled.

Hope this is useful

Bill

Code: Select all

#Just append this to your root .htaccess file

RewriteEngine on

#permanently redirect http://ecforum.org.uk/anything to http://www.ecforum.org.uk/anything
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^ecforum.org.uk
RewriteRule (.*) http://www.ecforum.org.uk/$1 [R=301,L]

#set browser cache
<FilesMatch "\.(jpg|gif|ico|jpeg|css|js|png)$">
ExpiresActive On
Header set Cache-Control "public,must-revalidate"
#for example....
ExpiresDefault "access plus 20 days"
</FilesMatch> [L]

#Be sure to keep a backup of the original as some servers make it almost impossible to debug .htaccess files.

[Carl Hibbard]

You currently have two identical forums ( http://ecforum.org.uk/ and http://www.ecforum.org.uk/) with some browsers maintaining caches of both. (Google seems only to refer to the www version )

This is done on purpose although I have considered a complete redirect yes

Also frequent verifying of files which normally never change, at the whim of browsers, takes almost as long as reloading them and adds to server load.

Yes I agree but security is increased in particular with session control when this extra level of checking remains in place

[Bill Porter]

You currently have two identical forums ( http://ecforum.org.uk/ and http://www.ecforum.org.uk/) with some browsers maintaining caches of both. (Google seems only to refer to the www version )

This is done on purpose although I have considered a complete redirect yes

Also frequent verifying of files which normally never change, at the whim of browsers, takes almost as long as reloading them and adds to server load.

Yes I agree but security is increased in particular with session control when this extra level of checking remains in place

I agree there are reasons not to redirect, which I omitted for brevity.

However I don't see any security implications for browser caching of files which are not under session control; I also don't suggest caching dynamically created (php) files only ones like http://ecforum.org.uk/styles/prosilver/ ... t_mine.gif which can be accessed directly anyway.

Currently whether and how long these directly accessible files are cached is entirely under the browser (user)'s control; adding a cache control is merely giving the browser advice about caching time and verification.

Sometimes, eg in phpbb user control panel, the browser forces a check of these files; at least in SeaMonkey the set expiry date is then overridden.

Perhaps you misunderstood what I was suggesting?

[Carl Hibbard]

Currently whether and how long these directly accessible files are cached is entirely under the browser (user)'s control; adding a cache control is merely giving the browser advice about caching time and verification.

Sometimes, eg in phpbb user control panel, the browser forces a check of these files; at least in SeaMonkey the set expiry date is then overridden.

Perhaps you misunderstood what I was suggesting?

I did yes, after taking a closer look at your code suggestion I do see what you mean but I do have a personal dislike of any sort of cache

[Carl Hibbard]

As we approach post number 30,000 I am going to risk asking what is this forum doing right and what is it doing wrong?

Less than a year and we "approach" the 40,000 number, so I do hope a lot of people continue to find the forum of value

[Warren Kingston]

I find it interesting and useful Carl.

If you pay for the hosting out of your own pocket, maybe you could ask for a small donation.