Hello,
setup is a varnish behind an other varnish - don't ask ;)
Is there a way to get the X-Forwarded-For from the first varnish to send
it to the backend (Apache with mod_rpaf) ?
I see in the varnishlog of the second varnish that there are 2
X-Forwarded-For (the client IP and the varnish IP)
H
Note that the linked article is from 2004. The kernels that RedHat uses are a
bag of hurt, not to mention ancient.
If you can upgrade to RHELl5 that may be the easiest fix (I can only assume
that the mmap limitation has been removed). Perhaps RedHat has newer RHELl4
kernels in a bleeding edge
amd64 refers to the architecture (AKA x86_64), not the particular CPU
vendor. (As a matter of fact, I was unaware of this limitation;
AFAIK it does not exist in FreeBSD.)
In any event, mmap()ing 340GB even on a 64GB box is a recipe for
disaster; you will probably suffer death by paging if
Thanks.
I checked /proc/cpuinfo and it shows intel processor.
So even with Intel, we see this limitation of 340 GB. This is a
serious limitation to me, since in Squid, we were using 1.5 TB of
storage and i thought i could mmap and use all the space for Varnish.
Any workarounds or working kernel ver
I have tried setting session_linger =50 on 2.0.4 and it seems that is
solves the problem ( I wasnt able to reproduce after that)
Kristian Lyngstol napsal(a):
> (Excessive trimming ahead. Whoohoo)
>
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 11:51:22AM +0100, Václav Bílek wrote:
>> When testing varnish throughput
I have submitted varnish-2.0.5 for Fedora and Fedora EPEL, and updates
to the stable releases will be requested, so they will trickle down to
the stable repos in a few weeks.
For RHEL, both el4 and el5 packages are now in the EPEL testing repo.
For those who are too impatient to wait for stable
