On Tue, 29 Nov 2016 11:26:50 -0500 Mark Staudinger <[email protected]> wrote: > > It's not clear if you actually wish to cache these requests. > > The best way to proceed would be to look at the output of varnishlog > for a few sample requests, and see what the values are for the "TTL" > log entry, and make sure they match the desired settings/behavior. > Not that if you change TTL/grace/keep settings during the request, > there will be multiple entries in the log. Here's a sample entry for > an object that was not cached: > > -- TTL VCL 0 0 0 1480436502 >
Hi, I've observed that the requests I don't want to cache have ttl and max-age = 0 as intended, but that they're stored in transient storage regardless. "Hit-For-Pass is now actually Hit-For-Miss" https://varnish-cache.org/docs/5.0/whats-new/changes-5.0.html I don't understand the finer repercussions of this but I thought it would result in less transient storage, not more. Also I have if ( beresp.http.Pragma ~ "no-cache" || beresp.http.Cache-Control ~ "no-cache" || beresp.http.Cache-Control ~ "private") { set beresp.uncacheable = true; set beresp.ttl = 120s; return (deliver); } else { unset beresp.http.set-cookie; } in vcl_backend_response. So i'm wondering if .uncacheable even applies to transient storage. Despite the counters going up, "varnishlog -q HitPass" returns nothing. -- Niall Murphy System Engineer Telefon: +49 30 / 92 10 64-23 Telefax: +49 30 / 92 10 64-323 SPARWELT GmbH Wöhlertstr. 12-13 10115 Berlin SPARWELT Webseiten: www.sparwelt.de - www.deals.de - www.promoszop.pl _______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
