[squid-users] range_offset_limit and idm
squid3 at treenet.co.nz
Tue Oct 27 12:19:16 UTC 2015
On 27/10/2015 10:54 a.m., HackXBack wrote:
> Facing the same problem,
> by default if i didnt use range_offset_limit , idm download the file with
> multiple mirros, all are 206 but cant be cached and hit when repeat the same
> url download.
> when i use range_offset_limit, idm download the file with 1 mirror, this
> will decrease the speed but it can be hit when repeat the same url download.
> so users have problems in this , they use idm because they need to download
> the file with multiple mirrors, and in the same time they need it to be hit
> when repeat the download file.
> there must be a way to cache idm downloads and make the download with
> multiple mirrors, right haa ?
Not until someone patches Squid to do Range response caching.
Meanwhile I question this "need".
D/L from multiple mirrors and caching the result as one object breaks
future D/L from having the same "need" met. Since the future responses
are served from cache instead of those multiple mirrors.
If it is acceptible for one fetch to be single-soruced. Then why is
there a need for an identical other requets to be multiple servers. It
does not make sense for the "need" to exist.
Seems to me the "need" is actually a "want" and a greedy one at that.
Remember that each browser/client fetching tens of requests. Means a
proxy deals with requests by the thousand. Means an origin is possibly
serving close to millions of endpoints with each response.
Now multiple those numbers by 5...
It is a better and more responsive system that conserves those
upstream/server resources and sends as few requests up as necessary.
More information about the squid-users