Has anything been applied to 3 yet? I'd like to apply this patch, but don't want conflicting / slightly different configuration or implementation.
Cheers, On 22/05/2010, at 1:53 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > Bug w/ patch for 2.HEAD at: > http://bugs.squid-cache.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2931 > > > On 18/05/2010, at 4:33 PM, Henrik Nordström wrote: > >> tis 2010-05-18 klockan 15:12 +1000 skrev Mark Nottingham: >> >>> /* >>> * The 'need_validation' flag is used to prevent forwarding >>> * loops between siblings. If our copy of the object is stale, >>> * then we should probably only use parents for the validation >>> * request. Otherwise two siblings could generate a loop if >>> * both have a stale version of the object. >>> */ >>> r->flags.need_validation = 1; >>> >>> Is the code in Squid3 roughly the same? >> >> Should be. >> >>> I'm tempted to get rid of the need_validation flag, as there are other >>> ways that Squid does loop suppression (e.g., only-if-cached on peer >>> requests, icp_stale_hit). What do people think of this? Is this howyou >>> addressed it. >> >> Don't get rid of the flag, but an option to not skip siblings based on >> it unless the sibling is configured with allow-miss >> (peer->options.allow_miss) is fine. >> >> When using ICP or Digests forwarding loop conditions is quite common, >> triggered by clients sending their own freshness requirements or slight >> difference in configuration between the siblings. >> >> Regards >> Henrik >> > -- Mark Nottingham m...@yahoo-inc.com
