Prasanth Baskar

Yes, this behavior exists. One way to improve it would be not deleting previous scan results, and instead serving images based on the last known scan results until new ones...

currently bruno has AUR package. https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/bruno but it is outdated

It is by design the proposal. Harbor doesnt send HEAD requests to check blobs. it will only send HEAD to check the right manifest exist upstream with this (there is...

Here is a link to the proposal - https://github.com/goharbor/community/blob/68d7320aaa671b4247f3de6b4ba555aa4dc6fdae/proposals/new/pull_through_proxy_cache.md?plain=1#L11 we can add this as a feature instead. Please feel free to create a proposal. we can discuss this.

@wy65701436 why `needs/follow-up` label this is a straightforward fix for a unmaintained library with drop in replacement examples - https://github.com/go-task/task/pull/2434 - https://github.com/go-task/task/issues/2171 - https://github.com/spf13/cobra/pull/2336

/label more-info-needed, kind/question

please share relevant logs, nature of the requests, and a bit more info of your setup. This might help us understand the issue better. Thanks

@stonezdj the proposal naming says otherwise. https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Agoharbor%2Fcommunity+pull+through+cache&type=code We need to discuss this clearly before moving on. Since, there seems to be some ambiguity because the docs and git history show...

Its good to note that pull through cache is the widely used in registry and these data intensive applications. whereas proxy cache is something that is widely used for webservers...

given that a lot of people are waiting for this to be merged https://github.com/goharbor/harbor/pull/22153. it might be premature to move entirely toward an online-only proxy cache. Thanks