On a different but related note:<br>
What would be best to use for long-polling connections?<br>
<br>
--<br>Henrik<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Per Buer <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:perbu@varnish-software.com">perbu@varnish-software.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Rob S <<a href="mailto:rtshilston@gmail.com">rtshilston@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Hi,<br>
><br>
> For most sites, we use Varnish to do both caching and load balancing.<br>
> However, for one or two, where it's not currently practical to cache, we<br>
> use it solely for load balancing etc. What's the best way of using Varnish<br>
> so that the backends aren't kept holding the connections whilst the client<br>
> is patiently downloading?<br>
<br>
</div>If you're sure you don't want _any_ caching (not even 1s); pass.<br>
<br>
However, if you're clients are downloading ISO images, the whole image<br>
must be fetched from the backend and stored before it is given to the<br>
client. In such conditions it makes sense to use pipe.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
--<br>
Per Buer, Varnish Software<br>
Phone: +47 21 54 41 21 / Mobile: +47 958 39 117 / skype: per.buer<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
varnish-misc mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:varnish-misc@varnish-cache.org">varnish-misc@varnish-cache.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.varnish-cache.org/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc" target="_blank">http://lists.varnish-cache.org/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>