[squid-users] refresh_pattern and same objects

[Yuri Voinov]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
 
30% is too low hit ratio to have cached proxy in infrastructure. There
is simple no reason to cache anything with low hit. It's enough to buy
more external throuthput. Agree?

Yes, I use 3.4.x version with custom settings. It seems safe enough for
my clients, and I have no complains about sites functionality. Sure, I
have exceptions, which is completely no cache. But remain part works good.

Also good tuned cache has another indicator - relatively low disk cache
growing (in addition to high hit ratio). This means that de-duplication
with store-ID works effectively and refresh_patterns are adequate.

And, finally, minimum user complains is a good enough indicator.

02.09.15 16:23, Eliezer Croitoru пишет:
> On 02/09/2015 13:00, Yuri Voinov wrote:
>>
>> I'm getting a very high hit ratio in my cache.And I do not intend to
>> lower its with myself. Enough and that on the opposite side of the
>> thousands of webmasters counteract caching their content on its own
>> grounds. Beginning from YouTube.
>
> Well, Most sane server side caches do allow and work with a 304
validation and in many cases it's good.
> Notice that I have not seen an access.log analyzer that counts
re-validation successfully until now.
> I do not know what the situation of your bandwidth usage or needs but
there is a term which called "over caching" and it depends on the
environment.
> If you see that the cache is working for you with higher numbers then
30% consider that your cache maybe is caching more then the standard cache.
> I am pretty sure that a domain analysis can find the more accurate
refresh_patterns that can leave you with high cache hit ratio and still
make the cache less vulnerable to config mistakes.
>
> Maybe clients didn't complained until now but it doesn't states that
they do not have any issues. It's just that they didn't got to you yet.
> If you are using 3.4.X and up you are in a better place then in 3.2.X
and older version so squid should be safe enough for a very ambitious
config file.
>
> All The Bests,
> Eliezer
>
> * Thanks for sharing the refresh_patterns discussion with others
> _______________________________________________
> squid-users mailing list
> squid-users at lists.squid-cache.org
> http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
 
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJV5uijAAoJENNXIZxhPexG9Z8H/RLWkrkYn727b3RT5s0rhA0U
SPODZWjxqq35s7FxEgXvo5B3IEtTGUydLi55PoQfGumr/M7EqVoWO1WirSqTKxEw
uybuWpa7a24zQA31/Vq3Sr2m/iFFz8BzZBAh6DtztHLsTzHZZTM5F08EAdre84o+
+fETLX8BNefHabSUlLqCXBA6skIMX/fjLIkB3YD3+wPfRl1JQmicw8XIE4Qo98JF
OyXQqUqiYoKr70lLjawe8YFXqCGLYxx+Tq3Oy+SvgQSOewbU95JxCg3Ri38JOrXZ
lqrBdX92/spgu7R6f2S0EBhRsGnNCNc0OL25GtD5tgDe8asEr183wWXwIjmSNbQ=
=yFQh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----