On 28 Mar 2006, at 08:45, Kenn Humborg wrote:
>> However, sensible as it sounds, it's not what's happening :-( My
>> original post was incorrect (it was late :-( ) and the count of 200
>> result codes I gave was in fact the count of ALL matches in the logs
>> for the redirected files on serverB, which did contain a significant
>> number of 304s. Apologies for the confusion, but the basic question
>> remains the same - why do 25% of the requesters to the original
>> server not follow the redirect?
>> Pull out the heavy guns... Grab a tcpdump for a few minutes on the
> two servers and get down and dirty :-)
>> If you can isolate a working and non-working case in the logs and
> look at the HTTP traffic for those requests in detail, you might
> find enlightenment.
I'm not sure I want enlightment THAT badly. These are busy servers,
so tcpdump would be grabbing a lot of data. And in the end, if the
requesting client simply isn't asking serverB for the file, as seems
to be the case, tcpdump will be to no avail.
Niall
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!
