[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2389?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13000018#comment-13000018
 ] 

Yonik Seeley commented on SOLR-2389:
------------------------------------

bq. This results in a bad user (developer) experience

I think I agree - I was bit by this a lot when the HTTP caching feature was 
added, until I trained myself to hold shift whenever I sent test queries to 
Solr.

> Default HTTP caching hurts developer experience.
> ------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-2389
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2389
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.1
>         Environment: Solr's example config
>            Reporter: David Smiley
>            Priority: Minor
>
> The default configuration in example/solr/solrconfig.xml for HTTP caching can 
> easily result cached responses (304) to a change configuration that would 
> result in a different response.  This results in a bad user (developer) 
> experience, especially for the novice Solr user. It bit me several times when 
> I was getting started.  Hopefully I don't need to further convince committers 
> that the default configuration is a problem.  So as a consequence, I've 
> always added never304="true" when starting new work with Solr and I recommend 
> that readers of my book do the same. I'd like to see this rectified.
> The lastModifiedFrom="openTime" attribute should not be a problem. The 
> openTime is "safe" and should not introduce bad cached responses, except when 
> the query response uses "NOW"; but there's little that can be done about that.
> The etagSeed is a problem because it uses IndexReader.getVersion() which is 
> the commit version and does not take into consideration the possibility of a 
> configuration change. I hoped that not specifying etagSeed would result in no 
> ETag but that did not occur -- I consider that a bug.  Similarly, I would 
> expect not specifying lastModifiedFrom would not result in a Last-Modified 
> header but I haven't checked what happens.
> I'm not an expert in caching headers but it seems a little redundant to use 
> both Last-Modified & ETag (& potentially Expires) when just one of these 
> would suffice.  Would it not?

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to