On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:54:57 -0600 Neil Schemenauer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Greetings Quixote and QP users,
>
> [tl;dr: see the patch below]
>
> Recently I ran into trouble with certain client and the problem
> appears to be caused by unexpected caching of dynamic resources. I
> haven't been able to conclusively determine the problem yet, but
> while looking into it, I realized that Quixote's use of the Expires
> header is not sufficient to prevent unwanted caching (QP inherited
> the same code). Has anyone else seen caching problems "in the wild"
> where "Expires: -1" is not sufficient?
>
Yes. In one case I had to set cache-control to must-revalidate in every
response because of a caching proxy between the client and the server.
....
> + the number of seconds the response may be cached. The default
> + is 0, meaning don't cache at all. This variable is used to set
> + the HTTP expires and cache-control headers. If set to None then
> + no headers will not be added.
+ no headers will be added.
....
> - expire_date = "-1" # allowed by HTTP spec and may work better
> - # with some clients
> - headers.append(("Expires", expire_date))
> + # The is the default case and makes sense for a dynamically
+ # This is the default case and makes sense for a dynamically
--
Patrik
_______________________________________________
Quixote-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.mems-exchange.org/mailman/listinfo/quixote-users
