On Friday 6 December 96, at 16 h 18, the keyboard of "Kolics Bertold,
University of Veszprem" <bertold@tohotom.vein.hu> wrote:
> If I echoping the nasty http://www.microsoft.com/, I receive different
> values for squid-1.1 and for squid-1.0:
This is perfectly normal. The expiration model is completely different in
Squid 1.0 and 1.1 (it started with 1.1beta10 or something like that).
See the 1.1 Release Notes for details. Basically, 1.1 issues GET
If-Modified-Since as soon as it has the slightest doubt about the
validity of a page. It is therefore much slower when the remote Web
server is far-fetched (a common case for europeans). On the other hand,
you have much less chances to serve stale data to your users.
You can tune that behaviour with refresh_pattern. The examples in the
distribution are, IMHO, much more oriented toward data freshness than
toward performance.
It will not help with http://www.microsoft.com/ which uses redirection to
a dynamic page.
Received on Mon Dec 09 1996 - 00:44:57 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:33:50 MST