On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 10:50:23 +1030, Brett Lymn wrote:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 08:45:12PM +0200, Eliezer Croitoru wrote:
this site is slow as hell.
I assume you mean the commbank site?
i know about couple of sites that has java scripts in them that
causes
this kind of behavior.
it's not related to any dns issue but the structure of the site.
the site is using two domains with ssl.
OK, then how do we explain the observations:
1) the site seems to be much more responsive with squid 2.5 stable 6
2) the site seems to be much more responsive if I add the IP
addresses
for site servers into /etc/hosts.
I'm still very suspicious that it is making use of HTTP/1.1 features
badly. The difference between 2.x and 3.1 is that 2.x advertise HTTP/1.0
to the server and passes the result back as HTTP/1.0 to the browser. But
3.1 advertises HTTP/1.1 abilities to the server and passes it back to
the client browser with HTTP/1.0, most features are passed straight
through, but some are down-mapped to HTTP/1.0 (chunked encoding and
100-continue responses are stripped).
also on normal surfing to the site it takes a longer time then any
other
site.
I know the site is not the most speedy at the best of times, though
it
can be surprisingly swift sometimes *but* there is a massive speed
difference going from one version of squid to the next and also by
effectively bypassing the DNS lookups. There is definitely something
fishy going on.
Can you get a full traffic trace of the requests and responses headers
going through both the fast and slow versions of Squid? You may have to
collect at both before and after Squid to notice anything different.
Amos
