Re: TCP_MEM_HIT on CGI requests? solved!

thanks, I have found the problem though,
it was my fault
I defined 2 ACLs

like this, but it is not working somehow ( in the old versions of squid it
was working if
I put 2 or more ACL names in one line in this new versions if I put 2 or
more
ACL names on one line it just does not work )

acl QUERY urlpath_regex cgi-bin \?
acl ispro src 195.174.18.0/255.255.255.0
no_cache deny QUERY ISPRO

then I changed it to

acl QUERY urlpath_regex cgi-bin \?
acl ispro src 195.174.18.0/255.255.255.0
no_cache deny QUERY
no_cache deny ISPRO

and everything is ok now,

thanks for the reply

Dave J Woolley wrote:

> > From: Evren Yurtesen [SMTP:yurtesen@ispro.net.tr]
> >
> > I thought squid was supposed to not to cache requests which includes
> > cgi-bin or ? in the URL string ?
> >
> The default is to cache them if they are cacheable,
> which most times they are not, but the comments
> recommend:
>
> # There is no default. We recommend you uncomment the
> following
> # two lines.
> #quid.conf.default line 273/1892 16%
> #acl QUERY urlpath_regex cgi-bin \?%
>
> > So what does the message below mean?
> >
> > 932149906.922 22 195.16.221.8 TCP_MEM_HIT/200 487 GET
> > http://mail.ispro.net.tr/cgi-bin/mail.cgi? - NONE/- text/html
> >
> The returned page was cacheable, but you didn't read
> the comments.
>
> This is only likely to be a problem if the CGI script
> returns a temporary redirect, but the server actually
> resolves that redirect into the actual page. CGI pages
> that are cacheable but not redirects are almost certainly
> supposed to be; in any case, any GET type access is
> potentially cacheable, although the HTTP drafts now make
> an exception because of past abuses.
Received on Fri Jul 16 1999 - 10:43:57 MDT