<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- <br>
Hash: SHA1 <br>
<br>
Yep. Can we sum near hits with hits to determine real cache hit
ratio? Or this is not correct?<br>
<br>
29.01.2015 19:57, Amos Jeffries пишет:<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">> On 29/01/2015 11:24 p.m., Yuri
Voinov wrote:<br>
><br>
> > Amos,<br>
><br>
> > btw.<br>
><br>
> > Which type of hits cachemgr collects and shows? TCP_HIT
only?<br>
><br>
> > What about other HIT-types?<br>
><br>
> All of them, broken down into cache-HITs and near-HITs
categories.<br>
><br>
> As you can see in the info report, like this:<br>
><br>
> "<br>
> Median Service Times (seconds) 5 min 60 min:<br>
> HTTP Requests (All): 0.05331 0.04519<br>
> Cache Misses: 0.03622 0.04519<br>
> Cache Hits: 0.00000 0.01387<br>
> Near Hits: 0.09219 0.23230<br>
> "<br>
><br>
> Amos<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> squid-users mailing list<br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:squid-users@lists.squid-cache.org">squid-users@lists.squid-cache.org</a><br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users">http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users</a></span><br>
<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
<br>
Version: GnuPG v2
<br>
<br>
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUykuqAAoJENNXIZxhPexGPFcIAJ55XDBJKp6zitqyg4YBwZ4a
<br>
2Et8V9WjEarpbhA/a3AlbVOWPpufQDwUNDXAgfYuWQQM5G24Fyr+baybZV8jbzEb
<br>
pJ9zvH8xJ0+a4kBNYjjya8bLXU9PzxuSVyLiQUxtShyzE2aB5MxNsZ37vj1lcXYb
<br>
P6MyA/bn6sFr+uV7ixdRs6LklGTow60toXv+5F17NgwTj3vSa/rKkoTfS3FXHf/G
<br>
oAJQH90If5KOOapR7wo6sTr5EU6OceIwrDLmtRbqwBtRxdDXi3AQcE8lUcDGb16k
<br>
8qzPgmSGCBJYwpxnaL0gFYjgs/HWq+DMh3xvnOT1iZDe4osa9hkJgVlmJohFqzw=
<br>
=KPd1
<br>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>