Re: Default value of gzip_proxied

Hello Maxim, Thanks for having taken the time of explaining it all! It seems HTTP/1.0 interoperability is seriously flawed... Anyhow, now I understand nginx' default behavior, which makes sense. ​Our needs are very specific, since nginx is hidden behind an internal cache, but the general case, re

Re: Default value of gzip_proxied

Hello! On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:59:24PM +0100, B.R. wrote: > > > The gzip_proxied > > > > > > default value is set to honor the HTTP/1.0 protocol (which does not have > > > the Vary header and thus is unable to cache differe

Re: Default value of gzip_proxied

Hi, ​ > > The gzip_proxied > > > > default value is set to honor the HTTP/1.0 protocol (which does not have > > the Vary header and thus is unable to cache different versions of a > > document) in some proxies. > > You are stil

Re: Default value of gzip_proxied

Hello! On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 07:11:17PM +0100, B.R. wrote: > Hi Maxim, > > There is still something I do not get... > > The gzip_proxied > > default value is set to honor the HTTP/1.0 protocol (which does not have > the Va

Re: Default value of gzip_proxied

Hi Maxim, There is still something I do not get... The gzip_proxied default value is set to honor the HTTP/1.0 protocol (which does not have the Vary header and thus is unable to cache different versions of a document) in some

Re: Default value of gzip_proxied

Hello! On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 03:14:22PM +0100, B.R. wrote: > I do not get why you focus on the gzip_vary directive, while I was > explicitely talking about gzip_proxied. > The fact that content supposedly compressed might actually not be because > it contains a 'Via' header is the root cause of

Re: Default value of gzip_proxied

I do not get why you focus on the gzip_vary directive, while I was explicitely talking about gzip_proxied. The fact that content supposedly compressed might actually not be because it contains a 'Via' header is the root cause of our trouble... and you just told me it was for HTTP/1.0 compatibility.

Re: Default value of gzip_proxied

Hello! On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 04:20:12AM +0200, Gena Makhomed wrote: > On 22.03.2015 3:31, Maxim Dounin wrote: > > >- You assume that the behaviour in question is only needed for > > HTTP/1.0 clients. That's, again, not true, as using "Vary: > > Accept-Encoding" > > isn't a good idea eith

Re: Default value of gzip_proxied

On 22.03.2015 3:31, Maxim Dounin wrote: - You assume that the behaviour in question is only needed for HTTP/1.0 clients. That's, again, not true, as using "Vary: Accept-Encoding" isn't a good idea either. As already mentioned, even if correctly supported it will cause cache data dupli

Re: Default value of gzip_proxied

Hello! On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 04:05:05PM +0100, B.R. wrote: > Hello Maxim, > > So HTTP/1.0 is the reason of all that. > Now I also understand why there are those parameters allowing to compress > data that should not be cached: nginx as webserver tries to be smarter than > those dumb HTTP/1.0 p

Re: Default value of gzip_proxied

Hello Maxim, So HTTP/1.0 is the reason of all that. Now I also understand why there are those parameters allowing to compress data that should not be cached: nginx as webserver tries to be smarter than those dumb HTTP/1.0 proxies. I was wondering, though: are there real numbers to back this compa

Re: Default value of gzip_proxied

Hello! On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 07:41:59PM +0100, B.R. wrote: > I recently bumped into some trouble with a client caching uncompressed data > without understanding where it came from. > > After long investigation on what appeared to be random, I narrowed it to > the gzip_proxied >

Default value of gzip_proxied

I recently bumped into some trouble with a client caching uncompressed data without understanding where it came from. After long investigation on what appeared to be random, I narrowed it to the gzip_proxied directive. Return c