Hi all, I've been hacking at mod_cache a bit, and was surprised to find that part of the decision to serve previously cached content or not was being made by the backend provider and not mod_cache; specifically, the expiration date of the content seems to be checked by mod_disk_cache (as part of open_entity), and if the provider check fails, mod_cache doesn't even know about the entity (and therefore, in the case of a caching proxy, can't treat it as a possibly stale entity upon which it can just do a conditional GET and possibly get a 304, rather than requiring mod_proxy to rerequest the entire entity again).
When I originally started looking at the family of cache modules, I assumed that all of the decision-making logic would be in mod_cache, while the mod_xxx_cache providers would be "dumb" file-stores (at least, as far as mod_cache is concerned). Is this not the case? If it is, would patches be acceptable if I have the time to try to rectify the situation (at least somewhat)? Issac
