Re: [squid-users] getting contents from sibblings

On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 04:51:36PM +0100, Ard van Breemen wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 04:42:16PM +0100, Ard van Breemen wrote:
> > We use icp to keep the caches in sync. But lately we noticed the
> > caches do not co-operate anymore. A test setup of (almost) the
> > same configuration still works.
> It seems that the neighborsCount is bouncing up and down:
> Or better:
> # grep neighborsCount cache.log
> 2003/02/21 16:10:55| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:10:55| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:10:55| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:10:56| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:10:59| neighborsCount: 12
> 2003/02/21 16:11:00| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:11:00| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:11:00| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:11:00| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:11:00| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:11:00| neighborsCount: 12
> 2003/02/21 16:11:00| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:11:00| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:11:00| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:11:00| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:11:00| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:11:01| neighborsCount: 12
> 2003/02/21 16:11:01| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:11:01| neighborsCount: 0
> 2003/02/21 16:11:01| neighborsCount: 0

Hacking some more I've added some debugging to the squid code.
It seems that sibblings are not allowed to refresh data. So once
an object is cached, it will never use a sibbling to update the
cache once it is expired. In our situation it means that objects
will be requested 12 times from the real servers :-(.
Anyway, hacked the refresh check away, and now we have a clean
neighborsCount of 12 each time...
(Our goal is to have an accelerator farm, and not a proxy farm,
so this is a good thing :-) ).

-- 
program signature;
begin  { telegraaf.com
} writeln("<ard@telegraafnet.nl> SMA-IS | Geeks don't get viruses");
end
.