https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40779
--- Comment #7 from Mark Bergsma <[email protected]> 2012-10-19 15:04:25 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > Here is my attempt to add Range support to Varnish, when it's streaming > > files: > > https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/28361/1 > > Cool! > > > Despite all this, if we want to be serious about video support, we'll need > > to > > setup some entirely different infrastructure, probably using > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_Live_Streaming > > HTTP Live Streaming is not for streaming static files. It's for live > audio/video broadcasting, where there's no "start" and "end" to the file for > caching purposes. It *might* simplify caching, but it will make the client > and > server way more complicated than they probably need to be. Sure, but it can of course also be used when start/end are available. > I think we're best off pushing for increasingly better byte range support in > Varnish. Alternatively, we could beef up our Swift (or whatever) > infrastructure so that it can deal with the load without having a caching > proxy > in front. Well, neither Squid nor Varnish support partial object caching, which is what's really needed to make this work and perform well. Since it's complex, it won't happen anytime soon in Varnish, and the fact that it appears to be patented, doesn't help at all, either. In any case, I've got my implementation of Range requests with streaming working in Varnish now: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/28379/2 So that will allow us to make Varnish work like Squid now. We'll see how this goes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
