Re: [squid-users] Difference between TCP_MISS, UDP_MISS

Dan Trainor wrote:
> Hello again -
>
> Reading my logs when trying to play with ICP and HTCP, I see a few
> options that I'm not too familiar with. I see TCP_MISS and UDP_MISS.
>
> >From what I've read and understand on the documentation of the general
> log, TCP_MISS is written when an object is not found in *this* cache,
> and a UDP_MISS is written when an object is not found in *the* cache.
>
> Now, my question is are the difference between the two the difference
> between not finding the object on either a single server or via
> ICP/HTCP? Is that where the differentiation is? This is what I
> understand from the documentation, but I just wanted to make sure that
> my interpretation was correct.
>
> Thanks!
> -dant
>

For ICP/HTCP query, your server will log UDP_MISS/HIT, If you found
UDP_HIT you would expect TCP_HIT followed soon.

1211405991.407 0 192.168.182.8 UDP_MISS/000 68 ICP_QUERY
http://video1.foo.bar:8020/01/47ccdcfd.flv - NONE/- -

In case someone getting file from your proxy, now your server log TCP_XXX
And in this case, if your server found HIT from your sibling/neighbor
you will see TCP_MISS with SIBLING_HIT or something similar.

1211405990.193 197970 61.114.111.122 TCP_HIT/200 10551690 GET
http://video1.foo.bar:8020/01/48345aa0.flv - NONE/- video/flv
1211405990.657 148869 61.27.146.156 TCP_MISS/200 5860778 GET
http://video1.foo.bar:8020/01/4780515a.flv - FIRST_UP_PARENT/videoserv1
video/flv
1211406200.674 5541 221.90.102.240 TCP_MISS/200 438409 GET
http://video1.foo.bar:8020/01/47b26d73.flv - SIBLING_HIT/videocache1
video/flv

Let say
UDP_MISS : object not in my cache, so you should get it yourself
TCP_MISS : object not in my cache, I will get it for you
Received on Wed May 21 2008 - 21:53:55 MDT