Oops, just now spotted your signature. Is this just an iteration?
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Rogier 'DocWilco' Mulhuijzen < [email protected]> wrote: > How is this patch set different from the soft-purges that Varnish Software > was working on? > > > On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Lasse Karstensen < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Magnus Hagander: >> > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Lasse Karstensen >> > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Attached is a small patch set that implement soft purge support >> >> for Varnish trunk. >> [..] >> >> The main use case for soft purges are big Varnish setups with many >> >> backends and automated purging systems. When doing maintenance on one >> of >> >> the backends, you end up with automatically purging something that >> can't be >> >> recreated right now and Varnish starts sending 503 replies. >> >> With softpurge the grace handling will kick in and serve a stale >> object instead. >> > Is there anything about this that actually becomes different in the >> > "with many backends" scenario? I've been looking forward to this >> > feature for many usecases with a single backend - when that backend is >> > slow or unreliable. I don't see why the number of backends would make >> > any difference, but am I missing something about the implementation? >> > (Automated purging is exactly the usecase for me though) >> >> No, there is nothing in there that is specific to how many backends you >> have. >> >> I was just trying to set the stage a bit, since it might not be entirely >> obvious when you need this. >> >> -- >> Lasse Karstensen >> Varnish Software AS >> http://www.varnish-software.com/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> varnish-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev >> >> >
_______________________________________________ varnish-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
