Re: [squid-users] An example to squid cache affecting user-agents(Firefox,Chrome,wget\curl)

On 07/11/2013 07:44 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> On 12/07/2013 3:20 a.m., Eliezer Croitoru wrote:
>> On 07/11/2013 05:03 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>>> On 11/07/2013 11:40 p.m., Eliezer Croitoru wrote:
>>>> I have been testing quite some time some urls for cachability.
<SNIP>
>> Sorry about it.
>> The problem is that admins and me analyse the access.log and consider a
>> X_HIT response to be a valid HIT response.
>> I think that the way cache admin analyse the log and understand what the
>> log means is different from admin to admin.
>> I wanted to explain in a more detailed way the logic I was explaining
>> before but since I am not always full of words about it I can describe
>> it in couple ways and not touch the other admin.
>>
>> I wanted to make sure that:
>> 1. there is or there isn't a bug related to Vary headers.
>> 2. make sure I understand where in plain view without digging into the
>> code I understand the bugs and squid behaviour.
>> 3. not just talk without a more detailed debug logs.
>> 4. prove\show squid 3.2\3 changes that you have mentioned about the
>> no-cache directive which should be documented in a more detailed way.
>> Since admins dosn't understand it in many cases like I wasn't sure and
>> pretty confused about it I believe that it helped and will help others
>> understand the issue.
>>
>> I think that now that the ignore-no-cache was removed there is might be
>> a need to add a Warning message while parsing squid.conf that will tell
>> admins about the new behaviour of refresh_pattern.
>
> There is. You see it with -k parse.

Thanks!
>
>> There is the "Removed option ignore-no-cache. Its commonly desired
>> behaviour is obsoleted by correct HTTP/1.1 Cache-Control:no-cache
>> handling."
>>
>> But It took me pretty while to actually notice it was there and
>> understand the meaning of it.
>
> Do you have any better wording?
>
> Amos
I will have... And I am writing about it..
It will take sometime but since nobody asked about it yet I assumed they
either didn't noticed or noticed but never thought that the effect looks
like my description.

I still don't have a due date for the new document I am writing but I am
working very hard to describe the for the differences between 2.7 which
is a legacy.

Eliezer
Received on Thu Jul 11 2013 - 19:10:09 MDT