Partial Requests (206) on Reverse Proxy Cache

Hi,

we use an nginx reverse proxy cache to serve media file downloads.
An issue we currently have is that for the first uncached requests to
the proxy, nginx is unable to respond to partial-requests and returns
HTTP 200 instead which results in errors for some download clients.

Is there a workaround for this problem?

  • Would it be possible when disabling sendfile or using direct i/o or
    forwarding uncached requests directly to the origins and caching in the
    background?

Thanks and kind regards,
Nik

Posted at Nginx Forum:
http://forum.nginx.org/read.php?2,149469,149469#msg-149469

Hello!

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 08:03:04AM -0500, niwo wrote:

Hi,

we use an nginx reverse proxy cache to serve media file downloads.
An issue we currently have is that for the first uncached requests to
the proxy, nginx is unable to respond to partial-requests and returns
HTTP 200 instead which results in errors for some download clients.

“Some download clients” probably have to be fixed, as 200 is
allowed response for range requests.

Is there a workaround for this problem?

You may pass Range requests to backends with something like

proxy_set_header Range $http_range;
proxy_set_header If-Range $http_if_range;

and don’t cache responses to these requests at all:

proxy_no_cache $http_range $http_if_range;

Maxim D.

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 7:32 AM, Maxim D. [email protected]
wrote:

and don’t cache responses to these requests at all:

proxy_no_cache $http_range $http_if_range;

Should nginx honor “Range” requests for files that are in cache
locally? 0.7.67 doesn’t seem to do so in my testing. In fact, it
always seems to send 200 with the entire file, even for static files
that are hosted on the local file system.

Is Range support unimplemented?


RPM

2010/11/11 Maxim D. [email protected]:

Most likely you tested it wrong.

Is Range support unimplemented?

It is, and works ok here.

Oops, you’re quite correct. I was testing it wrong. I goofed the
syntax of the Range header (using “Range: 0-100” instead of “Range:
bytes=0-100”). My apologies, I misunderstood that the explicit
“bytes-unit” is required by RFC 2616, even though the RFC defines
“bytes” and no other range units.

RPM

Hello!

On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 03:16:11PM -0600, Ryan M. wrote:

and don’t cache responses to these requests at all:

proxy_no_cache $http_range $http_if_range;

Should nginx honor “Range” requests for files that are in cache
locally? 0.7.67 doesn’t seem to do so in my testing. In fact, it

It does so as long as response in cache has Content-Length header.

always seems to send 200 with the entire file, even for static files
that are hosted on the local file system.

Most likely you tested it wrong.

Is Range support unimplemented?

It is, and works ok here.

GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: localhost
Range: bytes=0-10

HTTP/1.1 206 Partial Content
Server: nginx/0.8.53
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 00:04:34 GMT
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Length: 11
Connection: keep-alive
Last-Modified: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 11:12:56 GMT
Content-Range: bytes 0-10/1445

<!DOCTYPE h Maxim D.