<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03/19/2014 06:50 PM, Stephen Wood
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+pzux9s19QBWaXQXwuP6btJ9d5g_LexcAMVObLSeP2smFgpCA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Can we clarify exactly why? My understanding is
that varnish is a web accelerator for a <i>website</i>, and in
practice it will only cache for a single domain. It can't be
setup to cache for all domains.</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Short version: Varnish needs you to *predefine*, as backends, every
domain you want to cache for.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+pzux9s19QBWaXQXwuP6btJ9d5g_LexcAMVObLSeP2smFgpCA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>I can imagine you can get around this by using a varnish
+ squid pair, but the performance would be unacceptable for
an ISP. Not to mention that fact that making varnish highly
available and distributed is a lot of work on its own.</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Varnish + squid is doable, then the squid installation would be
Varnish' one and only backend, which in turn resolves and caches ad
hoc. I have no idea how this would perform, but it would give you
the combined flexibility of both products.<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Bjørn<br>
</body>
</html>