Re: [squid-users] A bug? (was "cache deny and the 'public' token")

From: Henrik Nordstrom <hno@dont-contact.us>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:22:15 +0100

On Sun, 2008-03-23 at 01:42 -0700, Ricardo Newbery wrote:

> I guess another alternative to the 'public' token is to instead issue
> a 'private' token with any cookie-authenticated response that should
> not be cached. This just moves the default cache strategy for
> authenticated responses to "cache everything, unless it's private"
> instead of "do not cache anything, unless it's public". Hmm... this
> may be a better approach in any case, since it plays better with other
> shared-caches that might be encountered downstream of my server.

Problem is that as soon as you enable caching of URLs gving split views
shared caches will start caching them, and with the only thing
differentiating a request for a public copy with a request for a private
copy being the Cookie headers (of which there may be plenty, and often
changing) you have to say "Vary: Cookie". But since each user will most
likely carry his own set of cookies (and often a changing set) each
request will be pretty much unique to the shared cache, almost
eliminating any opportunity for a cache hit.

Regards
Henrik
Received on Mon Mar 24 2008 - 04:24:25 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Apr 01 2008 - 13:00:05 MDT