- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
tldr;
Set that minimum TTL to something between 40 minutes (2400 seconds) and 1 hour; this is a perfectly reasonable range.
Set that minimum TTL to something between 40 minutes (2400 seconds) and 1 hour; this is a perfectly reasonable range.
Sounds good, let’s give that a try and see what breaks.
Yeah, I thought so to. I’ll definitely try that
Btw, is there a way to tweak firefox so it always uses cache and only updates on manual site reload?
Are you trying to make an offline website? If so, you could look into using a Service Worker which would give you full control over when the content gets refreshed.
Laptop, mobile, bad line; it’s annoying if the page (which should already be in cache since i opened it hours ago) says “No internet :(” just because it got unloaded.
There are lots of reasons to use really low TTLs, but most are a temporary need. Most of the times I had to set low TTLs for records were for hardware migration projects where services were getting new IP addresses. But in a well managed shop this should always be temporary. The TTL would be set low the day before the change, then set back to a normal value the day after the change. I feel the author is correct in that permanently setting low TTLs just covers up a lack of proper planning and change management.
The only thing off the top of my head that I can think absolutely requires a permanently low TTL is DNS based global load balancing for high uptime applications. But I’m sure there are other uses. I agree that the vast majority of things do not need a low TTL on their DNS record.
So the options are to herd a million cats, or to set low TTLs? Hmmm …
Lol, reported for the URL “blog”
Thats our automod, we keep an eye out for blogs. Every now and then we get spammed with personal blogs about off-topic things.
