I was searching for a simple Nginx microcache solution and I end up seeing two ways to have microcache. Some tutorials use proxy_cache, while others fastcgi_cache. What are the differences, pros and cons between these two solutions?
Thanks!
Asked
Active
Viewed 5,361 times
6
-
Trey are for proxy_pass and fastcgi_pass respectively. There is no point to compare them – Alexey Ten Aug 15 '14 at 03:28
-
I'm not asking which one is better. I would like know why they are used for microcaching. For microcache purpose, what is the difference between them? – Daniel Aug 15 '14 at 03:49
-
1If you use proxy_pass to access backend you must use proxy_cache. The same for fastcgi_pass/fastcgi_cache. – Alexey Ten Aug 15 '14 at 04:01
-
1Other than that There is no difference between them – Alexey Ten Aug 15 '14 at 04:02
2 Answers
9
The difference between the two is the protocol used to communicate with the backend.
fastcgi_cache is related to the FastCGI backend protocol. It caches output from FastCGI connected backends.
proxy_cache is related to backends that use HTTP as the backend protocol, and it caches output from HTTP connected backends.
Tero Kilkanen
- 36,796
- 3
- 41
- 63
2
fastcgi is used in far more setup assistance for nginx caching than the proxy_cache. You are more likely to run into websites that offer substantive articles for configuring fastcgi caching than for proxy_cache so thats a pro.. to use fastcgi
l33tcodes
- 31
- 1
- 4