In message <caoxzevapwdzfezc+sabajsav6yujjkcqok1dt2itrbrp2a_...@mail.gmail.com> , Per Buer writes:
>> > storage is a nice-to-have to avoid cold caches after restarts/crashes, >> > but 4.0 clearly needs some work before it goes anywhere near production. >> >> It sounds like you've upgraded to get persistent? Persistent is still >> experimental, just as it was in 3.0. > >Experimental is misleading, it makes it sound like the code has a future. I >think the persistence code is still there because nobody has bothered >disabling it yet. > >There is no work being done on the persistent. I doubt someone will pick it >up. There's no formal decision on the future of -spersistent, but if Varnish-Software has (also) given up on it, maybe we should make that decision right now and drop -spersistent before 4.0.1 ? Any input ? -- 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] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
