Search results

I don't know what you want to tell me?! I merely completed your unfinished sentence.

If you are use a UNIX socket, host should be set to /path/to/memcached.sock, but in this case it isn't UNIX. Otherwise the connection test wouldn't pass.

https://www.litespeedtech.com/support/forum/threads/please-use-the-official-wordpress-forum.16028/

Vary differences? Difference to what?

There is no special source for it, because it is just a rewrite rule that follows Apache's way to define it, so look at Apache documentation.

If all sources are dynamic (static sources also??), then there is no need to disable the browser cache because such sources are not cached by design, but it depends on your application. For dynamically generated sources it makes sense to disable the browser cache, but not for static sources. You...

Yes, it will work with LiteSpeed as well, but why do you want to disable browser cache?

You should use LiteSpeed Slack to get this issue be answered. https://www.litespeedtech.com/slack

You still don't understand the difference between the "vary" response header and the E=Cache-Control:vary directive. If you want to create a different cache copy depending on the device, then you have to define the appropriate conditions for the rewrite rule. It would then look something like...

Do you use any cache plugin? If yes, which one?

You should use LiteSpeed Slack to get this issue be answered. https://www.litespeedtech.com/slack

No, it isn't. Since there is a difference in the term "vary". The HTTP vary header is primarily intended to tell the browser that there is different content depending on the device used. However, this cache vary header has nothing to do with LiteSpeed cache vary. Therefore it is not possible to...

These tips don't work on any page, because the topic isn't about influencing the browser cache behavior, but the server-side cache. Cache-Control is not x-litespeed-cache-control!

@solaris2023 You are still talking nonsense. If there is an issue with permissions, then the programming is responsible for it first of all. LSPHP is not a fundamentally different PHP. LSPHP is an optimized compilation of PHP built to work with LiteSpeed products through the LiteSpeed SAPI...

I'm sorry to be so blunt, but you're talking nonsense. The LiteSpeed web server is neither more nor less insecure than other web servers. 99.99% of hacks are based on bad programming and since PHP is the most widely used scripting language, it mostly affects almost all PHP scripts.

https://www.litespeedtech.com/support/forum/threads/please-use-the-official-wordpress-forum.16028/

Support for cache plugin for Wordpress is provided at Wordpress support forum only. This forum doesn't support cache plugin for Wordpress any longer. https://www.litespeedtech.com/support/forum/threads/please-use-the-official-wordpress-forum.16028/

The same link is displayed in the footer of LiteSpeed cache plugin for Wordpress.

Yes, tell the counter not to count the crawler. That's it. The crawler cannot make itself invisible. It requests the URLs in the same way as a natural user.

This job must be done by the counter function, because the crawler can't tell the counter:"Please don't count me." ;)