Inconsistency about cache's valid_sec
fangpeng1986 at gmail.com
Thu Jul 20 14:24:29 UTC 2017
got it, thank you.
2017-07-20 21:11 GMT+08:00 Maxim Dounin <mdounin at mdounin.ru>:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:22:46AM +0800, Peng Fang wrote:
> > From my side, this is a compromise for reality. Because not all upstream
> > servers are controlled by ourselves, especially for a 3rd CDN provider.
> > There are many customers who want to get highly customized expiration
> > settings, for example, 10 senconds for */a.jpg, 1 minite for */b.jpg, 10
> > minites for *.zip and so on,but they don't what to control thsese
> > by sending Cache-Control family headers. So we have implemented a
> > logic in header filters supportting these requirements for every request.
> > Since it does not meet the standards, there is indeed no reson for you to
> > change the existed code logic. We coud totaly ignore and hide
> > family headers for these customuers, and keep on setting valid_sec in
> > header filters.
> > Woud you mind giving some advices for this kind of scenario? Thanks very
> > much.
> An obvious though suboptimal solution would be to use a separate
> proxy layer which will add appropriate headers to control caching.
> Maxim Dounin
> nginx-devel mailing list
> nginx-devel at nginx.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the nginx-devel