On 08/08/2017 06:00 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: > I'm getting quite a bit of "transaction-end-before-headers" errors in > my access.log. > > 1502192404.759 000000 10.43.25.85 NONE/000 0 NONE error:transaction-end-before-headers - HIER_NONE/- - accessRule=- - > Some statistics: > ================ > > File error total lines > access.log-20170716 49627 2211867 > access.log-20170717 359333 8314838 > access.log-20170718 395747 8805268 > access.log-20170719 371742 9443484 > access.log-20170720 365298 9095541 > access.log-20170721 325402 7264478 > access.log-20170722 79154 2188264 > access.log-20170723 56376 2540638 > access.log-20170724 337140 8791890 > access.log-20170725 349014 8540723 > access.log-20170726 329261 8341711 > access.log-20170727 355226 8780064 > access.log-20170728 293500 8062144 3.6% > access.log-20170729 46597 2233428 2.1% > access.log-20170730 60287 2318682 2.6% > access.log-20170731 330181 8568843 3.8% > access.log-20170801 260704 7855986 3.3% > access.log-20170802 295127 7099761 4.1% > access.log-20170803 330608 8036505 4.1% > access.log-20170804 234662 7040284 3.3% > access.log-20170805 42260 1987658 2.1% > access.log-20170806 36579 1931714 1.9% > access.log-20170807 303962 7472408 4% Interesting: Higher traffic volumes result in a higher portion of "empty" connections. Do you know what changed on 20170728? A Squid upgrade or a perhaps configuration change? > I'm using squid-5.0.0-20170709-r15238. Is there any way of finding out > what kind of queries cause this? I would not call these connections without any headers/bytes "queries", but if you want to learn more about them and/or to check Squid's classification, consider collecting a packet capture (and access-log client ports so that it is easier to find the matching packets in the capture). HTH, Alex. _______________________________________________ squid-users mailing list squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
