From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org>, pgsql-www <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: ML archives caching 404 results |
Date: | 2014-10-07 14:06:46 |
Message-ID: | CABUevEyAPUbkn4ozpspSk5+Q=cRgF-3EwMHxj93UUQ4_9aXjVA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-www |
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org> wrote:
>>> When adding my messages to CommitFest, I noticed that when I'm fast enough
>>> to click on the resulting link, I get a 404 page from mailing list archives,
>>> I guess if archives loader hasn't processed my message yet. This 404 result
>>> gets cached for a long time, so my message is not viewable even after links
>>> to it appear in archives.
>
> FWIW, I've been annoyed by that too ...
>
>>> Is there a default expiration time set in Varnish somewhere? Maybe the
>>> solution is as easy as setting a lower TTL for 404 results in Varnish:
>>> http://www.garron.me/en/bits/avoid-varnish-cache-404-error-page.html
>
>> Yes we cache the 404 pages, and that's definitely intentional.
>
> It might be intentional, but is it really useful? How much traffic do
> we get to nonexistent pages?
From broken search engines running amok every now and then - quite a
bit. During normal operations, not much.
But we can probably easily drop it to say 5 minutes or so for 404's -
would that be enough?
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marti Raudsepp | 2014-10-07 14:06:58 | Re: ML archives caching 404 results |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-10-07 14:03:44 | Re: ML archives caching 404 results |