varnish as general purpose web cache

[Sven Oehme]

my case is very special. all the nodes download several GB size files
and they are all static, think more about a CDN case. i will take a
look at squid.

thx for the reply. Sven

On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 10:05 AM Rainer Duffner <rainer at ultra-secure.de> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Am 03.11.2019 um 17:35 schrieb Sven Oehme <oehmes at gmail.com>:
> >
> > you are saying you can't do this with varnish or you are just suggesting to see if I can make it work with squid ?
> >
>
>
>
> Varnish is a cache for incoming request to a website (or a couple of websites)
>
> It was never intended as a forward-cache, like Squid. And I doubt it can actually be made to work that way in any even remotely reasonable fashion.
>
> That said, I would really like to know if Squid (which would be the primary tool to try this) does bring any kind of significant improvement these days - at all.
>
> A lot of content is personalized (everything that carries a cookie) and Squid does (hopefully) not store and cache it.
> On top of that, Squid, per definition, cannot store content delivered over HTTPS (which is at least 90 and probably closer to 97%) of content these days.
> You’d need to setup SSL interception etc.pp.
>
> Browsers are a lot better at caching locally, too, these days, as are websites at instructing browsers to do so.
>
> So, in summary, it’s not the 90s anymore, better get a faster WiFi/internet connection or apply some traffic shaping to nobody can abuse all the bandwidth.
>
>
>
>