Hello all, I'm using Stingray v9.4, and I'm enabling content caching on my website. I can verify that the content is being put into the content cache via the admin panel. However, when I'm monitoring the HTTP traffic via Fiddler, I see that the Stingray always respond with a HTTP 200 "OK" code. This means the entire request body is sent back over the wire. However, shouldn't it send an HTTP 304 ("Not Modified") to save on bandwidth? If I request several large .js files, I never get the 304 that I would expect, always an HTTP 200. This causes my bandwidth usage to go up and the caching benefits are not really visible, as it takes longer to send the data over the wire than to send a body-less response of 304. If I turn off content caching at the load balancer, my web servers will appropriately respond with a 304. Using Apache Benchmark, I actually get much more requests per second directly calling my web servers than using content caching from the load balancer. I turned on webcache!verbose, and the response I get in the X-Cache-Info field says " not cacheable; response code not cacheable " My end goals is to have much of the static files served by the load balancer, leaving dynamic requests for the web servers. Is there a way to correct this, either with an out-of-the-box setting or with a TrafficScript rule?
... View more