On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Jordon Bedwell <jordon_at_envygeeks.com> wrote:
> On 09/29/2010 03:47 PM, George Herbert wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt
>> <Ralf.Hildebrandt_at_charite.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> * Andrei<funactivities_at_gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>> These are my Squid stats. I have about 23% of cache hits.
>>>
>>> I have four squid machines, an the Request hit rate average is at:
>>> 29.3%, 27.2%, 27.4% and 26.7% (last 24h)
>>>
>>> So your values could be a bit better.
>>
>> As the userbase size increases the cache hits will increase.
>>
>> It took literally slightly over 1 million users at the prior site I
>> ran Squid for to get slightly over 50% cache hits. 23% for a small
>> site (300 users) is reasonable, depending on the workload and how much
>> of the sites are all-dynamic content which can't be cached.
>>
>>
>
> Dynamic is subjective. What the world considers dynamic most of the is
> actually dynamically generated static content that rarely changes and always
> wastes CPU time. I hardly consider one post a day dynamic and unnecessary
> for sending "cache me" headers (to squid at least) for the next 24 hours.
> You can cache all content, dynamic or not, it's just not recommended, you
> can do it with squid or you can trick squid into thinking it's not dynamic
> anyways, which is what we do on some our sites for pages that we know rarely
> change.
This is HIGHLY content-specific, and in many cases is horridly unsafe.
Your mileage may vary. Know what your users are actually doing...
-- -george william herbert george.herbert_at_gmail.comReceived on Wed Sep 29 2010 - 21:02:17 MDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Sep 30 2010 - 12:00:04 MDT