[squid-users] Caching of directory objects, UDP_MISS
Hello again, all - Searching through my logs, I see UDP_MISS statements which are almost exclusively when an ICP query is made for an object of a directory type, not a file type: 1211373356.819 0 192.168.15.87 UDP_MISS/000 131 ICP_QUERY http://static-test-dev.domain.local/dev-secure-test.domain.local/content/viralPlayer/generator-test/ - NONE/- - It would make sense as to why Squid would be handing out a UDP_MISS for that, since it would also make sense that Squid has no desire to cache directories - but if that's the case, why would Squid ever report on a miss like that? How about disabling that object for logging altogether? Thanks! -dant
Re: [squid-users] Caching of directory objects, UDP_MISS
Dan Trainor wrote: Hello again, all - Searching through my logs, I see UDP_MISS statements which are almost exclusively when an ICP query is made for an object of a directory type, not a file type: 1211373356.819 0 192.168.15.87 UDP_MISS/000 131 ICP_QUERY http://static-test-dev.domain.local/dev-secure-test.domain.local/content/viralPlayer/generator-test/ - NONE/- - It would make sense as to why Squid would be handing out a UDP_MISS for that, since it would also make sense that Squid has no desire to cache directories - but if that's the case, why would Squid ever report on a miss like that? How about disabling that object for logging altogether? Thanks! -dant Squid does not know about those real servers disks at all. So it may be directory listing in HTML, index page or others possible HTTP response of that URL. You can customize access log not to log this thing.
Re: [squid-users] Caching of directory objects, UDP_MISS
On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 04:23 +0700, Phattanon Duangdara wrote: Dan Trainor wrote: Hello again, all - Searching through my logs, I see UDP_MISS statements which are almost exclusively when an ICP query is made for an object of a directory type, not a file type: 1211373356.819 0 192.168.15.87 UDP_MISS/000 131 ICP_QUERY http://static-test-dev.domain.local/dev-secure-test.domain.local/content/viralPlayer/generator-test/ - NONE/- - It would make sense as to why Squid would be handing out a UDP_MISS for that, since it would also make sense that Squid has no desire to cache directories - but if that's the case, why would Squid ever report on a miss like that? How about disabling that object for logging altogether? Thanks! -dant Squid does not know about those real servers disks at all. So it may be directory listing in HTML, index page or others possible HTTP response of that URL. You can customize access log not to log this thing. Thanks for the response, Phattanon - I figured that would be the case, I just wanted to confirm. I will look into crafting a rule to not log such elements. Thanks -dant
Re: [squid-users] Caching of directory objects, UDP_MISS
On ons, 2008-05-21 at 14:03 -0600, Dan Trainor wrote: It would make sense as to why Squid would be handing out a UDP_MISS for that, since it would also make sense that Squid has no desire to cache directories Squid does not make a distinction between a directory and a page or another HTTP objects. It's all HTTP objects. But on most servers directory listings is dynamically generated and by default not cacheable. However. directories with an index page quite often is cachable. For example http://www.squid-cache.org/Versions/v3/3.0/ Regards Henrik signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [squid-users] Caching of directory objects, UDP_MISS
On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 00:18 +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: On ons, 2008-05-21 at 14:03 -0600, Dan Trainor wrote: It would make sense as to why Squid would be handing out a UDP_MISS for that, since it would also make sense that Squid has no desire to cache directories Squid does not make a distinction between a directory and a page or another HTTP objects. It's all HTTP objects. But on most servers directory listings is dynamically generated and by default not cacheable. However. directories with an index page quite often is cachable. For example http://www.squid-cache.org/Versions/v3/3.0/ Regards Henrik Hello, Henrik - That would make perfect sense in what I saw, seeing as where were no index pages being served from the URL which I saw as part of the miss. Thanks for the explanation. Thanks -dant
