>>>>> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:46:14 +0200, Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said: > fre 2006-06-30 klockan 17:24 +0200 skrev Andreas J. Koenig: >> I'd be very happy, if the squid team could reconceive this as a buggy >> behaviour. Isn't it wonderful to improve software by just removing a >> few lines? > It's a tradeoff. As the comment says there is not really any benefit in > refreshing 0-sized objects as the overhead is the same as a full > request. > I would think what you want to change is actually the 60 seconds limit a > few lines earlier... this limit is suitable for normal forward proxies > in most setups, but reverse proxies may have quite different > requirements. Yes, you're right, this solves the problem for *us* and it's nice that Squid 3.0 has it configurable with the minimum_expiry_time parameter. I still don't get it why the code lets downstream Squids with default minimum_expiry_time cache our 1-byte answers but not our 0-byte answers. This behaviour adds latency and traffic because our not changing headers are sent over again and again and they are always over 400 byte. -- andreas
