2006/5/3, Henrik Nordstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
ons 2006-05-03 klockan 10:35 +0200 skrev Aurélien Bras:
> "If you add a no_cache rule after Squid has been running for a while,
> the cache may contain
> some objects that match the new rule. Prior to Squid Version 2.5,
> these previously cached
> objects might be returned as cache hits. Now, however, Squid purges
> any cached response for a request that matches a no_cache rule."
Yes, but this doesn't mean the cached content will be purget. Only that
requests matching your no_cache rules will not look into the cache and
their result will not be cached.
Other requests for the same URL but not matching your no_cache rules
will be cached as usual.
> First request : MISS ok.
> Second request : REFRESH_HIT on FRONT and REFRESH_MISS on BACK
>
> Not good
Why?
My object is STALE, the refresh should be good and make a HIT, but
BACK make un MISS, is mean that the object is dowloaded another time,
am I wrong ?
> , after disable : #no_cache deny BACK
>
> Thirst request REFRESH_HIT on FRONT and REFRESH_HIT on BACK
>
> It's ok but BACK can put new objects in cache :(
Why is this better?
Because the object isn't dowloaded, I save the bandwitch.
Regards
Henrik
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQBEWHcJB5pTNio2V7IRAqUdAJ4wgn9ixqSe7CLhVmUiw2hvDiArugCfZcUz
mQ9VHa6y3iAXZw1qudkZC5A=
=Ldxj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
