Could it be because the traffic is coming back thru a CSS? I doubt it, but
I thought I'd mention that's what's actually load-balancing the source
servers. (Remember, this solution is just to cache content across a slow
link, but the actual app servers (again, Tomcat) are load-balanced to one
"source url" in the datacenter.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Amos Jeffries" <squid3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 10:12 AM
Subject: Re: NEWBIE: force squid to store/cache xml responses?
AJ Weber wrote:
Right, as I said, this is a specialized case, accelerating exactly ONE
application server (actually a few, but just load-balanced of the same
"site"). There is no way, if my config is correct, that either another
Squid proxy will be able to leverage mine as a peer, nor any way a user
can use mine as a proxy to any other website. Thus, the concerns about
any problems manifesting "downstream" aren't an issue.
As for getting the app server to properly set the headers, I'm wondering
why Tomcat isn't doing that in the first place? It's a pretty
good/stable app server and usually serves content reliably. Could it be
because Tomcat would be likely conforming to HTTP 1.1, not 1.0 and thus
setting the headers differently?
not likely. possible the other way around where some controls technically
don't appear in 1.0. But have been in wide use for years anyway.
your experience of tomcat seems to differ vastly from mine.
Amos
--
Please be using
Current Stable Squid 2.7.STABLE9 or 3.1.6
Beta testers wanted for 3.2.0.1
