CGI or HTML
Thread Starter
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 30,809
Likes: 15
From: Sydney
One of the differences I noticed between H-A and SHO is that H-A threads are HTML (created by a CGI), whereas SHO pages are a drect response from a CGI query.
As a result, my upstream proxy caches the H-A HTML pages (I see old versions of the pages). Same goes for this board.
The solution for me is to add '?gbdsfgsd' to the end of the URL and trick the proxy into thinking it's a CGI and hence it loads a fresh version. What a PITA!
I'm sure others experience this. Some probably know the trick, others probably just give up.
Is SHO using the same software (UBB)?
Is direct CGI access an option?
As a result, my upstream proxy caches the H-A HTML pages (I see old versions of the pages). Same goes for this board.
The solution for me is to add '?gbdsfgsd' to the end of the URL and trick the proxy into thinking it's a CGI and hence it loads a fresh version. What a PITA!
I'm sure others experience this. Some probably know the trick, others probably just give up.
Is SHO using the same software (UBB)?
Is direct CGI access an option?
Administrator
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 20,274
Likes: 4
From: Toronto, Canada
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AusS2000:
One of the differences I noticed between H-A and SHO is that H-A threads are HTML (created by a CGI), whereas SHO pages are a drect response from a CGI query.
As a result, my upstream proxy caches the H-A HTML pages (I see old versions of the pages). Same goes for this board.
The solution for me is to add '?gbdsfgsd' to the end of the URL and trick the proxy into thinking it's a CGI and hence it loads a fresh version. What a PITA!
I'm sure others experience this. Some probably know the trick, others probably just give up.
Is SHO using the same software (UBB)?
Is direct CGI access an option?[/quote]
Hi yes that is annoying. SHO does not use the same software. It is possible to add an HTML header to the topic display to expire the page after a specific amount of time. It's also possible to make it volatile so that it expires as soon as you load it. The browser will see this header in the cached page and decide whether it needs to reload or not.
It's on the list.
Thanks for the suggestion.
One of the differences I noticed between H-A and SHO is that H-A threads are HTML (created by a CGI), whereas SHO pages are a drect response from a CGI query.
As a result, my upstream proxy caches the H-A HTML pages (I see old versions of the pages). Same goes for this board.
The solution for me is to add '?gbdsfgsd' to the end of the URL and trick the proxy into thinking it's a CGI and hence it loads a fresh version. What a PITA!
I'm sure others experience this. Some probably know the trick, others probably just give up.
Is SHO using the same software (UBB)?
Is direct CGI access an option?[/quote]
Hi yes that is annoying. SHO does not use the same software. It is possible to add an HTML header to the topic display to expire the page after a specific amount of time. It's also possible to make it volatile so that it expires as soon as you load it. The browser will see this header in the cached page and decide whether it needs to reload or not.
It's on the list.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Administrator
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 20,274
Likes: 4
From: Toronto, Canada
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AusS2000:
Is the "nocache" header different for the browser and the proxy server or are they one in the same?[/quote]
I'll have to look that up but I think they are different.
Is the "nocache" header different for the browser and the proxy server or are they one in the same?[/quote]
I'll have to look that up but I think they are different.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post