Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back

View Post [edit]

Poster:	sandymac	Date:	Sep 23, 2004 2:30pm
Forum:	freecache	Subject:	Coral vs FreeCache

Coral: limits cached files to 50 megs FreeCache: doesn't seem to have a limit other than the space a mirror chooses to reserve Coral: tries to mirror sites by encoding the real hostname in the coral hostname so that relative links work. FreeCache: is designed to just cache one file at a time. Coral: tries to uses a smart DNS method to send clients to the nearest mirror and frequently fails. FreeCache: does HTTP redirects to each mirror and fails when FreeCache.org isn't responding. Coral: doesn't (yet) support Accept-Ranges which would allow seeking in streamed media FreeCache: does support Acccept-Ranges Both will have problems with the caching of undesirable content (spam, illegal-porn, etc). Neither follow the HTTP to the letter but I don't think the HTTP spec writers envisioned either of them. Both are hacks. Six one, half dozen the other.
This post was modified by sandymac on 2004-09-23 21:30:54