my case is very special. all the nodes download several GB size files and they are all static, think more about a CDN case. i will take a look at squid.
thx for the reply. Sven On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 10:05 AM Rainer Duffner <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Am 03.11.2019 um 17:35 schrieb Sven Oehme <[email protected]>: > > > > you are saying you can't do this with varnish or you are just suggesting to > > see if I can make it work with squid ? > > > > > > Varnish is a cache for incoming request to a website (or a couple of websites) > > It was never intended as a forward-cache, like Squid. And I doubt it can > actually be made to work that way in any even remotely reasonable fashion. > > That said, I would really like to know if Squid (which would be the primary > tool to try this) does bring any kind of significant improvement these days - > at all. > > A lot of content is personalized (everything that carries a cookie) and Squid > does (hopefully) not store and cache it. > On top of that, Squid, per definition, cannot store content delivered over > HTTPS (which is at least 90 and probably closer to 97%) of content these days. > You’d need to setup SSL interception etc.pp. > > Browsers are a lot better at caching locally, too, these days, as are > websites at instructing browsers to do so. > > So, in summary, it’s not the 90s anymore, better get a faster WiFi/internet > connection or apply some traffic shaping to nobody can abuse all the > bandwidth. > > > > _______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
