launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[Robert Collins <robertc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 09:14 -0500, Francis J. Lacoste wrote:


> I really think that that excluding bug heat from the etag calculation is the 
> right thing to do at this point. It's not like this information is up-to-date 
> anyway. Bug heat isn't a real time data, so it shouldn't be included in the 
> Etag.
> 
> As a general solution to the problem, Bjorn's suggest seems like a good one, 
> but on this particular problem, simply remove it from the calculation. And 
> it's probable that simply having a way to exclude some fields from the Etag 
> would solve 80% of our problems very cheaply.

For bug heat specifically, perhaps removing it from ETag is appropriate.
However, do bear in mind that folk may be getting stale responses many
months later if no other fields change: caches can be quite stubborn;
must-revalidate will, after all, look at the ETag.

-Rob

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part