Thanx for explanations! I changed timeouts from 0 to 3600. Internal clients are trusted, so I think it's ok. My overall experience is good. Very good. I use ATS as transparent caching proxy and it works like a charm. Last year I tried squid, and I canceled it. Complex pages load slower than w/o squid (at least, when you see it by own eyes). Also squid causes errors when: - uploading big files (video) - POSTing to HTTP11 servers, such as Redmine project management tool.
I will continue to use ATS with fixed timeouts and post results later. By now: Pros: + HTTP11 support (no errors which I saw when I was using squid) + Compact binary log ++ One big cache-db file instead of lot of small files +++ Caching algorithm works just fine out-of-the-box. I mean I don't need to tune "max_object_size", increase TTL for images and CSS files. Looks like ATS handles this things automatically. Cons: - A lot of config files - A lot of irrelevant config options. Why should I care? I want simple proxy. Today is XXI century, do you think HTTP caching is still so complex? :) - Need to compile it. Figuring out that I have to disable "fd_events" (or smth) on debian system takes time. Binary distribution is what users want, IMHO. - Lack of documentation. Missing features: * Proxy authorization. Now the only way is IP-based auth (bypass.config). It is useful to have Basic HTTP auth for authorizing clients. Of course, LDAP integration is welcome. Briefly: IMHO, ATS 2.1.4-unstable is stable enough for basic usage. It deserves to bear the name "beta" :) I remember that guy who uses 44Gb for in-memory caching and expects bad response time, but this is HUGE installation. As basic caching proxy, ATS works just fine. However, config files have to be simplified. I am thinking about writing wiki page "ATS installation as forward proxy", but I think today this is waste of time. You are reviewing configs, right? I mean that "log2 -> log" change. This is right direction. Thanx for your work, Alexey On Tue, 07 Dec 2010 09:04:58 -0700, Leif Hedstrom <[email protected]> wrote: > On 12/07/2010 08:10 AM, [email protected] wrote: >> More info. >> >> 1) Problem appears in both transparent and explicit proxy. >> 2) wget http://<VIDEOFILE> works. Problem appears in Opera, Firefox, >> Windows and Linux. >> 3) I tested video from youtube, seems like it works. However, video from >> vkontakte.ru causes >> ERR_CLIENT_ABORT very often. >> 4) I tested squid and video works fine. >> >> My idea is - problem is socket between browser and ATS. I changed: >> >> CONFIG proxy.config.http.keep_alive_no_activity_timeout_in INT 0 # was 15 >> CONFIG proxy.config.http.transaction_no_activity_timeout_in INT 0 # was 30 >> >> Error gone. Video stable. >> Is it right change? May it cause other problems? > > Heh, i was going to reply to your first email and suggest increasing > timeouts. Fwiw, 0 means no timeout. The first one doesn't make a whole > lot of sense, all that does is to let your browsers control KA timeouts > (which you might want, but I can't see how that affects this problem). > The second one however could cause problems, if the site burst highly > for some short amount of time, and then goes idle for a long time. > > I wa also going to suggest increasing > proxy.config.http.transaction_active, which I've noticed causes problems > with youtube if set too low (the new default for that one is 900s, which > is 15 minutes). Setting any of these timeouts to 0 has its own risk > (abuse, bad clients etc.), it'd probably be better to jack them up high > enough that the problem goes away, but that you still have some sort of > timeout. > > Curious to hear about your experiences (other than the timeouts) too. Is > Apache TS working as you expected so far? Any problems, concerns, > missing features, crashes etc.? > > Cheers, > > -- Leif
