Laurence Rowe l at
Thu Jun 3 01:32:14 CEST 2010

You are almost guaranteed to get unique cached objects for each user
with your Vary:

  Vary: User-Agent, Cookie, Accept-Encoding

Varying by User-Agent is never a good idea, there are thousands of
different user agent strings, as it includes both the browser version
number and operating system version number (including any patch
levels...). You will have to know how your backend application uses
this information in order to sensibly normalise the value.

Excepting the google analytics __utm. cookies which you strip, three
others are left from your first trace:

  Cookie: OAX=BDoAAktdupEAAym8; __qca=P0-1578676227-1264519209511;
__ngt_cli=9AD2EBDB8489C157C3867ADB; __utmz=7868

In the second trace you seem to have other cookies set as well.

  Cookie: s_cc=true; s_sq=%5B%5BB%5D%5D

If you need to vary on any information stored in a cookie, write some
VCL to extract that cookie, place it into another header, and then
Vary on your custom header. For instance, on a site where a user can
pick their language, I extract the value from the relevant cookie and
overwrite the Accept-Language header with the it, and then vary on


On 3 June 2010 00:01, vitaly burshteyn <vburshteyn at> wrote:
> Thanks for responce but still no dice...
> Just curious if I am getting Vary: User-Agent, Cookie, Accept-Encoding do i
> need to account for all 3 of those items?
> Also, how do you recommend to normalize User-Agent?
> Thanks
> Sorry about these questions but i am brand new to varnish.
> On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 6:05 PM, vitaly burshteyn <vburshteyn at>
> wrote:
>> On Jun 2, 2010 3:31 PM, "Laurence Rowe" <l at> wrote:
>> Different browsers have different Accept-Encoding headers (sometimes
>> just the difference between a comma followed by a space as the
>> separator rather than just a comma), so it's best to normalise this
>> header in ``vcl_recv``. I use something similar to the example at
>> to normalise the header
>> to either ``gzip`` or remove it completely.
>> Laurence
>> On 2 June 2010 19:32, vitaly burshteyn <vburshteyn at> wrote:
>> > Hi folks,
>> > Just curious if ...
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > varnish-misc mailing list
>> > varnish-misc at varnish...

More information about the varnish-misc mailing list