code 206 - visible as '206' in varnishncsa and as '200' from VCL code

Johnny Halfmoon jhalfmoon at
Mon Aug 1 16:44:01 CEST 2011

> ]] Johnny Halfmoon
> | thank you for your reply. I agree that the backend response would be
> | 200. But what I need to see is the actual response code Varnish sends
> | to the frontend, which should be 206. In the example code I therefor
> | explicitly read out VRT_r_resp_status , but still see code 200.
> 200 vs 206 is decided after vcl_deliver has run.  What is the use case
> for knowing 200 vs 206 earlier?  (If it's important, we can take a look
> at it, but phk indicated it probably wasn't trivial to make the decision
> earlier.)
> Regards,
> --
> Tollef Fog Heen

----- End message from tfheen at -----

Hi Tollef,

Well, to my understanding, the way I read out the delivery status is  
already after vcl_deliver has run. The status collection routine is  
called as follows for each backend:

sub vcl_deliver {
     C{ STATS_UPDATE(www_somesitename_com) }C

So at this point all delivery statusses (stati?) should be known to  
Varnish. This setup has been running succesfully for several months  
and it works for all codes except 206. Am I missing something here?

'We' have a setup here where we have about 30 different sites, big and  
small, all running of a cluster of 3 Varnish servers and log and graph  
the returncodes and several other parameters of each site seperately.  
Not having proper registration of the 206 codes does create a hole in  
our logging, but it has not proven to be an issue yet, although we are  
aiming to have this hole closed some time in the near future.



More information about the varnish-misc mailing list