JavaScript vs. Server-Side Includes

[John R. Little]

On Thu, 26 Jun 1997 15:09:07 -0400 Bill Drew 
<drewwe at MORRISVILLE.EDU> wrote:

> The demand on our
> server is little different before we used SSI.  The benefits of SSI far
> outweigh any negatives.
> 
> 
> > ... The difference being that if
> > I enable SSI for the entire web site, the httpd will search
> > for imbedded SSIs in each and every file served. 
> 
> On our server it only searches files with the extension of htmlx for
> SSI, not every file.  You will probably find it to be the case on most
> servers that only certain file "types" are processed for SSI.
> 

On that note I am mostly interested with the aspect of 
enabling SSI on the entire htdocs tree.

To quote a bit more from Chuck Musciano, he writes:

"For the vast majority of servers, include processing is 
not expensive. For these servers, I recommend that all 
HTML files be enabled for includes processing. This way, 
you can use server-side includes freely in all of your 
documents without having to use a special suffix."

That sounds good to me.  It would be nice to use includes 
in existing files without changing their filename and 
without worry of degraded server performance. How true is 
it that fully enabled SSI processing is "not expensive" 
thus enabling use of SSIs _freely_? 


--John
------------------------------------------------------
  John R. Little       Web Developer/Systems Librarian 
  Perkins Library * Duke University * Durham, NC       
  VOICE: (919) 660-5932    Email: john.little at duke.edu 
              http://www.duke.edu/~jrl/
------------------------------------------------------