RE: [squid-users] DNS-based reverse proxy peer selection, 2.5 vs 2.6

>From: Amos Jeffries [mailto:squid3@treenet.co.nz]
>Sven Edge wrote:
>>
>> Poking around the source for the squid-2.6.STABLE17 release
>currently in
>> Fedora, there's appears to be another source of DIRECT_NO besides a
>> never_direct, in peer_select.c.
>> http://www.squid-cache.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/squid/src/peer_select.c
>> I've got version 1.131, where there's an "if
>> (request->flags.accelerated)" that can cause a DIRECT_NO,
>but the most
>> recent version 1.134 has changed that. Not sure what the
>code's testing
>> for in either version, but from the commit comment it sounds
>like up to
>> now 2.6 was deliberately blocking direct access when in accelerator
>> mode.
>>
>> Maybe it's just a case of waiting for the next release?
>
>Aha, sounds like that yes. Fortunately Stable 18 is out already so if
>the change was included there you could use that one.
>Otherwise the 2.6 daily snapshot should be stable enough to use, just
>with a little testing required to be sure of it.

FYI, if
http://www.squid-cache.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/squid3/src/peer_select.cc
is where squid 3.0 comes from, that doesn't have the same change
applied.

Thanks for your help. :)

Sven
Received on Wed Feb 20 2008 - 02:59:41 MST