Re: Why is no-cache ignored on pending objects?

From: Duane Wessels <wessels@dont-contact.us>
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 11:43:14 -0700 (MST)

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:

> There is a section in the clientProcessRequest2() on cache hit processing
> relating to the no-cache flags on requests for STORE_PENDING objects which
> I do not quite get what it is about, and the CVS log comment does not make
> me any wiser.. what is done simply looks wrong to me, or at least missing
> some condition explaining when it should be done.

The only thing I can think of is this:

On the IRCache proxies I used to see some very aggressive (probably
non browser) user agents. Every request had the 'no-cache' directive
and it seems like it was re-issuing the request often, say after a
short timeout. When the URL was some big file on a far away server,
Squid accumulates numerous parallel downloads of the same object.
Depending on quick_abort settings, could be bad news.

So the hack was put in place to accomodate this broken client
(if it is the situation I am thinking of).

Duane W.
Received on Fri Jan 02 2004 - 11:43:16 MST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Sat Jan 31 2004 - 12:00:10 MST