On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Kristian Lyngstol
wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 01:36:00PM -0400, Nathan Kinkade wrote:
>> Thanks. The resolution is simple, but I just wanted to be sure.
>
> Always nice to verify :)
>
> By the way, I just read the labs.cc.o post [1] from when you started usin
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 10:51:00AM -0700, Ken Brownfield wrote:
(...)
> Thanks much, I think I'm all squared away with my user error. :-)
> Though it might be nice to more gracefully handle (or at least report)
> workspace overflows.
Yeah, I know... We haven't made any specific plans, but it'
On Sep 16, 2009, at 10:03 AM, Kristian Lyngstol wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 09:54:25AM -0700, Ken Brownfield wrote:
>> I'm a bit loathe to reenable this to get a full stacktrace and gdb
>> output, but if there's really nothing wrong with this I might
>> consider
>> it.
>
> Nothing wrong with
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 01:36:00PM -0400, Nathan Kinkade wrote:
> Thanks. The resolution is simple, but I just wanted to be sure.
Always nice to verify :)
By the way, I just read the labs.cc.o post [1] from when you started using
Varnish and I'm curious as to how you're doing now with regards to
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Kristian Lyngstol
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 01:16:20PM -0400, Nathan Kinkade wrote:
>> For some reason Varnish (2.0.4) doesn't seem to be respecting the
>> Content-Range header, so our users are unable to resume large
>> downloads that somehow got in
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 01:16:20PM -0400, Nathan Kinkade wrote:
> For some reason Varnish (2.0.4) doesn't seem to be respecting the
> Content-Range header, so our users are unable to resume large
> downloads that somehow got interrupted. Is this expected and normal
> behavior, or should this
Hi all,
For some reason Varnish (2.0.4) doesn't seem to be respecting the
Content-Range header, so our users are unable to resume large
downloads that somehow got interrupted. Is this expected and normal
behavior, or should this work? Do we need to add a rule in vcl_recv
that passes any incoming
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 09:54:25AM -0700, Ken Brownfield wrote:
> Ah, I stand corrected. But I was definitely having random crashes
> when I enabled the vcl_fetch() section below:
(...)
> I'm a bit loathe to reenable this to get a full stacktrace and gdb
> output, but if there's really nothin
Ah, I stand corrected. But I was definitely having random crashes
when I enabled the vcl_fetch() section below:
sub vcl_recv {
...
set req.http.Unmodified-Host = req.http.Host;
set req.http.Unmodified-URL = req.url;
...
}
sub vcl_fetch {
...
set o
