feat(proxy-cache): add ignore_uri_case to configuring cache-key uri to be handled as lowercase

[tobiasehlert]

Summary

The proxy-cache plugin uri input is taken straight from ngx.var.request and when incoming requests are randomized with lowercase and uppercase letters, all requests are handled as new ones.

The issue with this is that the proxy-cache sees then as unique requests, even if the backend request response is exactly the same and the cache-key should therefore be possible to set to lowercase that upstream servers are not receiving unnecessary requests.

Example of requests being randomized and handled as unique cache entries:

• /api/greeting/tobias
• /api/greeting/Tobias
• /api/greeting/tObIaS

Default of the ignore_uri_case is false and the cache-key will be based on the actual ngx.var.request, but when setting the parameter to true instead, it will be lowercased instead.

Checklist

• The Pull Request has tests
• There's an entry in the CHANGELOG
• There is a user-facing docs PR against https://github.com/Kong/docs.konghq.com - feat(proxy-cache): add ignore_uri_case to configuring cache-key uri to be handled as lowercase docs.konghq.com#5270

Full changelog

• Implementing new parameter called ignore_uri_case for the proxy-cache plugin to lowercase the request and use that for cache-key calculation.

Discussion reference

Rel #7821 & #10425

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[ghost]

hi @tobiasehlert ,add test case in #10466

[tobiasehlert]

hi @tobiasehlert ,add test case in #10466

@sabertobihwy should I close this PR? Your PR good good 👌

[hbagdi]

Hey @sabertobihwy, thank you for your PR. Could you please close it? We want contributors to work through the PR process and get to the finish line of merge. We wish to give everyone an opportunity to submit a clean and complete patch. If the PRs stall, then we can take someone's contribution and build on top of it (provided they have signed the CLA and we give them due credit).

@tobiasehlert Could you please write a test for this?

[ghost]

Hey @sabertobihwy, thank you for your PR.

OK, I'll close my PR. i just want to help @tobiasehlert write a test case. But I don't have permission to update it on his PR. So let's work together on this PR.

[samugi]

Looks good, just a couple of small suggestions

[samugi]

Note: the schema-change-labels check is expected to fail until this PR: #10479 is merged

[samugi]

One more thing @tobiasehlert, to keep compatibility with hybrid mode we need to add the new configuration parameter to the removed_fields for dataplanes older than 3.3.0, essentially adding this bit:

proxy_cache = {
  "ignore_uri_case",
}

in this section:

kong/kong/clustering/compat/removed_fields.lua

Lines 59 to 63 in f62b329

	[3003000000] = {
	acme = {
	"account_key",
	}
	},

[tobiasehlert]

One more thing @tobiasehlert, to keep compatibility with hybrid mode we need to add the new configuration parameter to the removed_fields for dataplanes older than 3.3.0, essentially adding this bit:

Sound important to add! I did that in 402f3e8 now :)

[tobiasehlert]

@samugi seems like something faulty in the second test.. https://github.com/Kong/kong/actions/runs/4425523590/jobs/7760716719#step:9:711

You have a clue why it complains on line 1435? :|

[samugi]

should be good now @tobiasehlert

[tobiasehlert]

should be good now @tobiasehlert

Awesome, thanks for the support @samugi 🥇

[samugi]

thank you for your contribution @tobiasehlert !!