I think you figured out the reason why I implemented no-cache and no-store as the same … no-store behavior should be sufficient to meet the no-cache requirements.

The use I'm thinking of is mostly along the lines of monitoring and debugging. Hence, I don’t mind the fact it’s not highly optimized. Is there anything wrong with still using the same code paths?

—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

[ { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "EmailMessage", "potentialAction": { "@type": "ViewAction", "target": "https://github.com/xrootd/xrootd/pull/1953#issuecomment-1467131885", "url": "https://github.com/xrootd/xrootd/pull/1953#issuecomment-1467131885", "name": "View Pull Request" }, "description": "View this Pull Request on GitHub", "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "GitHub", "url": "https://github.com" } } ]

Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list

To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-DEV list, click the following link:
https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-DEV&A=1