On 08/08/2017 06:00 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> I'm getting quite a bit of "transaction-end-before-headers" errors in
> my access.log.
> 
> 1502192404.759 000000 10.43.25.85 NONE/000 0 NONE 
> error:transaction-end-before-headers - HIER_NONE/- - accessRule=- -

> Some statistics:
> ================
> 
> File                error  total lines
> access.log-20170716  49627 2211867
> access.log-20170717 359333 8314838
> access.log-20170718 395747 8805268
> access.log-20170719 371742 9443484
> access.log-20170720 365298 9095541
> access.log-20170721 325402 7264478
> access.log-20170722  79154 2188264
> access.log-20170723  56376 2540638
> access.log-20170724 337140 8791890
> access.log-20170725 349014 8540723
> access.log-20170726 329261 8341711
> access.log-20170727 355226 8780064
> access.log-20170728 293500 8062144 3.6%
> access.log-20170729  46597 2233428 2.1%
> access.log-20170730  60287 2318682 2.6%
> access.log-20170731 330181 8568843 3.8%
> access.log-20170801 260704 7855986 3.3%
> access.log-20170802 295127 7099761 4.1%
> access.log-20170803 330608 8036505 4.1%
> access.log-20170804 234662 7040284 3.3%
> access.log-20170805  42260 1987658 2.1%
> access.log-20170806  36579 1931714 1.9%
> access.log-20170807 303962 7472408 4%

Interesting: Higher traffic volumes result in a higher portion of
"empty" connections. Do you know what changed on 20170728? A Squid
upgrade or a perhaps configuration change?


> I'm using squid-5.0.0-20170709-r15238. Is there any way of finding out
> what kind of queries cause this?

I would not call these connections without any headers/bytes "queries",
but if you want to learn more about them and/or to check Squid's
classification, consider collecting a packet capture (and access-log
client ports so that it is easier to find the matching packets in the
capture).


HTH,

Alex.
_______________________________________________
squid-users mailing list
squid-users@lists.squid-cache.org
http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users

Reply via email to