Maybe your nginx is not using the `.gz` file due to access permission
issue or something like that. Anyway, I'd be surprised for it to be a
package issue as I have the exact same version as you and have no issue.
Feels like an environmental issue to me.
--
You received this bug notification
Some, additional thoughts:
We have two separate files:
select2.full.min.js.gz
select2.full.min.js
A discussion from from 2015 suggests that Nginx computes ETags using last
modified time and content length.
SOURCE:
Our script is using:
gzip -c $FILENAME > $FILENAME.gz;
touch $FILENAME.gz -r $FILENAME
FWIW, we also just tried:
rm select2.full.min.js.gz
gzip --best --keep --force --no-name select2.full.min.js
The time stamps between the two files are an exact match:
... 75005
@pinnion, I'm still seeing differing ETags between those 2:
$ wget -qSO /dev/null
https://staging.dashboard.villadeus.com/js/select2.full.min.js.gz 2>&1 | grep
ETag
ETag: "667af11b-520f"
$ wget --compress gzip -qSO /dev/null
https://staging.dashboard.villadeus.com/js/select2.full.min.js 2>&1
We got sloppy there by not following up with `touch *` on the directory
contents. While this indeed breaks cache coherence, it doesn't seem to
affect the gzip_static behavior.
We resolved the problem on https://villadeus.com/ by manually updating to
nginx/1.26.1
The problem is still
@pinnion, I just checked a random asset from your site
(https://villadeus.com/wp-includes/js/jquery/jquery.min.js?ver=3.7.1)
and the `gzip` version has a different ETag than the uncompressed one:
$ wget -qSO /dev/null
https://villadeus.com/wp-includes/js/jquery/jquery.min.js?ver=3.7.1 2>&1 |
Hi Paride,
Apologies for delayed reply.
We're running 22.04.4 LTS. We switched to Ubuntu from CentOS7 last year. We
installed the *nginx* and *php8.1-fpm* using apt install immediately after
the initial install.
We've been applying regular updates using:
apt update
apt upgrade
We use the
Hello and thanks for your bug report. Looks like you are using
Package: nginx 1.18.0-6ubuntu14.4
from jammy-updated, but that update is from almost one year ago, and the
(only) d/changelog entry looks very unrelated to what you are reporting,
see [1].
Can you please share more information on
