In message <[email protected]>, Anton Stonor writes: >Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > >> Can you get me varnishlog of such a request ? I'm not able to >> tell from your description which path we're talking about. > >Sure, just thought this was intended behavior so I wouldn't bore with >details. Here we go.
Well, it may be intentional, I can't tell without the details :-) >Running Varnish 2.0.2 on Ubuntu, has tested on Debian Etch 64bit as well. > 9 VCL_call c hash > 9 VCL_return c hash > 9 HitPass c 1998529216 > 9 VCL_call c pass > 9 VCL_return c pass This is the important bit, you have a cached object that says this object cannot be cached, but should be passed. As long as that object exists, you will always hit pass. These "magic" objects are created when vcl_fetch() takes "pass" as action. >Same backend header, just added a cache-control request key. Succes: Not really, you are still doing a pass: > 9 VCL_call c hash > 9 VCL_return c hash > 9 HitPass c 1998529216 > 9 VCL_call c pass > 9 VCL_return c pass If you have your varnish-log, the XID 1998529216 is the one to look for, that created the "hit-for-pass" object for some reason. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [email protected] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. _______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] http://projects.linpro.no/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
