Re: [squid-users] Re: TCP_HIT and TCP_MEM_HIT

From: Amos Jeffries <squid3_at_treenet.co.nz>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 10:36:33 +1200

On 12.04.2012 03:25, WhiteSquid wrote:
> I would be interested in having this subject clarified again.
>
> I'm playing with 3.1.15 and I have not configured cache_dir. Hence,
> all my
> hits can only be from memory.
>
> Look at those numbers for example (very idle system, I agree):
>
>
>
> You can see no storage but still 99.6% of the hits are marked Disk
> hits and
> 0.4% are marked as Memory hits.
>
> Can someone please help me understand the numbers here?

There are many types of hits. REFRESH_UNMODIFIED, IMS_HIT, etc. most of
these are not separated out from a generic "all hits" statistic.

MEM_HIT is only the hits served from memory which required no
validation or special handling. The label "Disk hits" is a bit
misleading.

NP: if you are actually getting "TCP_HIT" specifically in the
access.log that would indicate there is still a disk cache_dir
somewhere. Or a bug in the label marking, which is not unsurprising
since the labeling system is a bit old/fragile.

Amos
Received on Wed Apr 11 2012 - 22:36:38 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Apr 12 2012 - 12:00:03 MDT