Strange Issue with cache and logged in users

[Guillaume Quintard]

On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 5:29 PM, Pinakee BIswas <pinakee at waltzz.com> wrote:

> We have been planning to replace nginx caching with Varnish and use nginx
> purely as a proxy. For some requests, we plan to bypass Varnish as they
> need not be cached. Also, we are serving static content using nginx.
>
Once this is sorted, I'd rather use varnish as a proxy, but, that's just me
:-)

>  To answer your query, it works fine without varnish. I have tested
> removing varnish and then adding it. I also, was surprised that it wasn't
> working properly as the logs say otherwise. Will investigate further.
>
Please do, the logs aren't showing anything weird. Note one thing: varnish
will automatically add the X-Varnish header and put the VXID of the request
(in case of a MIS/PASS) and the of the bereq (for a HIT), so when you get a
wrong object, you can look a the varnishlog (using "-d" to look at past
records), possibly filtering it with "-q" and check what was the cached
request.

One more thing, for the unlogged user, it seems your backend is replying
with a set-cookie header. I don't think it's necessary.

One more thing is the cookie in the request log isn't showing all the
> cookies:
>
> -   ReqHeader      Cookie:
> _xsrf=2|f25d8caf|ffacf1c86b71827915f94aed8e9aeace|1462920275;
> jivaana_country=IN; pagemap=0,0,0,0,0,1,0';
> mp_774636c1ed2371eaf99455f71871069c_mixpanel=%7B%22distinct_id%22%3A%20%221518b8ba6c314b-04bd3d4-6b1b237b-100200-1518b8ba6c428a%22%2C%22%24i
>
That's expected, varnish will truncate long log records, you can change
vsl_reclen to see longer lines in the log. It doesn't change what actually
goes on the wire.



-- 
Guillaume Quintard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/pipermail/varnish-misc/attachments/20160526/322bc6e5/attachment-0001.html>