On 09/13/2012 12:12 PM, Henrik Nordström wrote:
Is it a 200 OK response. Suspect it's a 304?
Thanks,
WIll check maybe it is.
..checked..
not 302
a fully 200 response.
1347525419.744116 127.0.0.1 TCP_MISS/200 767 GET
http://www1.ngtech.co.il/302.html - HIER_DIRECT/79.181.232.109 text/html
1
tor 2012-09-13 klockan 12:07 +0300 skrev Eliezer Croitoru:
> but in the logs is see a lot:
> 2012/09/13 11:48:51.798 kid1| StoreEntry::checkCachable: NO: not cachable
Is it a 200 OK response. Suspect it's a 304?
Regards
Henrik
On 09/13/2012 10:07 AM, Henrik Nordström wrote:
We might need to make this the actual method string instead of internal
>code to preserve store keys across squid versions.
Well I was wondering about it myself.
and I wanted to ask a thing but still didnt finished investigating about it.
I have se
tor 2012-09-13 klockan 12:05 +1200 skrev Amos Jeffries:
> Just had a thought. I wonder if this is related to the releases which
> people suddenly started having cache MISS for a period with no visible
> reason.
> That could be the releases where we added/removed methods from the
> registered se
On 13.09.2012 04:51, Henrik Nordström wrote:
ons 2012-09-12 klockan 10:26 +0300 skrev Eliezer Croitoru:
if it was a string what will be the string structure?
It's not a string.
The first hashed octet is the Squid internal method representation in
binary integer form. Followed by the requeste
On 9/12/2012 7:51 PM, Henrik Nordström wrote:
ons 2012-09-12 klockan 10:26 +0300 skrev Eliezer Croitoru:
if it was a string what will be the string structure?
It's not a string.
The first hashed octet is the Squid internal method representation in
binary integer form. Followed by the request
ons 2012-09-12 klockan 10:26 +0300 skrev Eliezer Croitoru:
> if it was a string what will be the string structure?
It's not a string.
The first hashed octet is the Squid internal method representation in
binary integer form. Followed by the requested URL.
See storeKeyPublic() function for detai
On 9/12/2012 12:57 AM, Alex Rousskov wrote:
On 09/11/2012 10:41 AM, Eliezer Croitoru wrote:
I do not know Ruby, but googling suggests that Ruby equivalent of
incremental MD5 hash creation would be something like this:
incr_digest = Digest::MD5.new()
incr_digest << url
incr_digest << me
On 09/11/2012 10:41 AM, Eliezer Croitoru wrote:
> I have seen some of the code but I dont understand on what the
> calculation being done in literal works.
> to explain myself.
>
> I do know that it uses the url and the method to hash for the key.
> so there is a public and private keys.
> private
I have seen some of the code but I dont understand on what the
calculation being done in literal works.
to explain myself.
I do know that it uses the url and the method to hash for the key.
so there is a public and private keys.
private is method+url+id
public is url+method.
the method\function
10 matches
Mail list logo