|
|
Posted by Snef on 10/17/06 07:34
Rik wrote:
> Snef wrote:
>> pittendrigh wrote:
>>> There must be millions of dynamically generated
>>> html pages out there now, built by on-the-fly php code
>>> (and jsp, perl cgi, asp, etc).
>>>
>>> Programatic page generation is transparently useful.
>>> But querying a database, negotiatinig lots of if-then-else logic
>>> and echo'ing html code out on port 80 every time a
>>> page is requested has to be a huge waste of resources.
>>>
>>> Why not use that logic to print static html instead of dynamic?
>>> The few pages that need to be dynamic (perhaps the results of a
>>> database
>>> query) probably represent only a small fraction of the total
>>> number of pages that are rendered by on the fly code.
>>>
>>> Seems to make sense to me. All you need to do is work
>>> the output directories into your code logic somehow,
>>> and do a few one-time-only mkdirs before printing out the static
>>> html.
>>>
>>> Am I missing something?
>>> Why is it so little open source page generation software acually
>>> works that way?
>>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I made a CMS that will create some 'static' html files on the server.
>> When the page changes, the page is generated again and written to the
>> server again. This way I save a lot of db queries and resources.
>>
>> When the page needs something dynamic (like scheduled newsitems) it
>> is fetched through AJAX or (users choice) a 'more-dynamic' page (php
>> and in the future also in Perl or ASP) is generated.
>>
>> The reason I choose this method had to do with the fact that the user
>> of the CMS should be able to easily link to a generated page. For
>> most of the people it is easier to search for somthing linke
>> http://mydomain.com/aboutus.htm than
>> http://mydomain.com/index.php?page=aboutus or something similiar.
>
> There are many reasons to use static pages, but this is not one of them.
> Using .htaccess or similar, you can fetch requests easily. I usually use a
> hierarchical tree for pages, like directories, so:
> http://www.example.com/page1/sub3/ etc...
>
> These directories do not exist, but route to the same php file, which
> serves up the pages (be they database driven or included html-files, logs
> specific requests for the stats, and performs any other actions required by
> that page.
>
> Static pages can be good for sites that don't change that often, with
> little to no interaction, but readable urls is not a reason for it.
>
> The way Moot mentions, creating html-files on the fly on changes, and serve
> them up, is a method I've used often, no sense in keep generating the
> pages. But they'll route through the php, which will check wether it's a
> dynamic/user-interaction page or not, and on that basis will serve the html
> file or build the page (and log traffic, specific requests, referrers etc).
>
> Added bonus is that when a database is stretched for resources or
> unavailable, a lot can be served, and you can even tell the users to come
> back later on the dynamic pages when the database is unavailable. It
> shouldn't be offcourse, but the safer the better :-).
>
> Grtz,
Rik,
Don't understand me wrong... my story didn't come out that well i think. I want
the pages to be generated for the customer so that they can easily look them up
in a editor (link FCKEditor). They just go to the directory where the file is an
select it to create a link. That is the easiest way for customers (for this
project). So the coice to use generated 'static' files is not just to create
those urls! I know i can use .htaccess to create friendly urls (if I had apache,
but I don't).
The main reason was to lower the use of database requests and other resources.
And for my project I needed those URL's but that was not the reason to do it
this way! :)
Snef.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|