[doc or benchmark] Comparison against other caching alternatives

Create issue
Issue #2 new
ahom created an issue


I'm somewhat new to wheezy.web but already greatly appreciate working with it. I'm however not so sure about using wheezy.caching right now, it seems very good on paper however I'm wondering how it compares against alternatives such as Varnish in terms of features and speed.

I think it would be a good addition to the documentation (or a blog post) to have your view on that, I guess that with wheezy.caching cache invalidation/dependencies is way easier to handle, but I would be very interested to have your take on the matter.

Cheers, Antoine

Comments (1)

  1. Andriy Kornatskyy repo owner

    Some caching benchmarks are here.

    In most places where you use varnish you can use nginx caching (preferred) for static content. This is what wheezy.web quick starts promote.

    The caching dependencies and content cache (see wheezy.http, and tutorial) let you serve dynamic application out from cache. You have control through dependencies and handy cache profiles. This is a big step beyond of what varnish and related can offer. Of cause that requires some knowledge that you can learn from related documentation and demos.

  2. Log in to comment