On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 4:42 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp <[email protected]> wrote: > In message <[email protected]>, > =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel_Br=FC=D > Fler?= writes: > >>Question about purge/ban: I'm confused about this renaming. > > The new 3.x terminology is: > > A ban will prevent any objects currently stored, which matches the > condition, from being served ever again. > > The test is only made when objects which are hit as result of a > cache lookup, or if the "ban_lurker" can see a way to check > without a request being present. > > Bans can test both the URL and HTTP headers, with exact matches or > regular expressions, so you can for instance ban all images with > one command, or ban all content tagged with a special purpose > HTTP header. > > > A purge removes objects from the storage immediately in response > to a cache lookup. Therefore the only criteria you can use, > implicitly, is the lookup hash value, normally URL+Host:, but > you can change that in vcl_hash{}. > > Usually you would use this in PURGE like processing in vcl_hit{}. > > I am pondering ways to make it possible for PUT/POST to invalidate > any cached copies of that object, but this is tricky and someway > down my todo list. > > -- > 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://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc >
Hey, Purging on Headers is a brilliant idea :) I'm looking forward to test it and to come back to you. cheers _______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] http://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
