I've written a short blog post on the subject since this seems to come up from time to time.
https://www.varnish-software.com/blog/404-handling-varnish-cache I need to figure out how we'll deal with this in 4.0. Per. On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Per Buer <[email protected]>wrote: > On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Jan-Frode Myklebust > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 09:06:15AM +0100, Per Buer wrote: >> > > >> > > @per, you suggested saint mode. Why? What would it do better than >> Tobias' >> > > solution? >> > >> > Saint mode works if you have two backends in the same director. Then it >> > blacklists that object from that backend for a certain time. A restart >> > would then direct the request to the other backend. >> > >> > Tobias solution is to have two backends. The other one is only used when >> > the first one fails. >> > >> >> Ideally we want both. Our two hosts in the director are fully >> functional, but one of them might not have received a given file yet. So >> we want to try the other backend in the director, not mark it as faulty >> when it gets the 404. >> > > I'm pretty sure you didn't read my reply properly. :-P > > Note that the blacklist is temporary. If you know that you spend up to > five seconds updating your server you set it to 5s. > > > -- > <http://www.varnish-software.com/> *Per Buer* > CTO | Varnish Software AS > Phone: +47 958 39 117 | Skype: per.buer > We Make Websites Fly! > > Winner of the Red Herring Top 100 Europe Award 2013 > > > -- <http://www.varnish-software.com/> *Per Buer* CTO | Varnish Software AS Phone: +47 958 39 117 | Skype: per.buer We Make Websites Fly! Winner of the Red Herring Top 100 Europe Award 2013
_______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
