Hit ratio dropped significantly after recent upgrades

Florian Tham fgtham at gmail.com
Tue Dec 13 21:13:18 CET 2016


The log shows that the fetched object is introduced into the cache with 
both TTL and grace time set to 120s each:

    --  VCL_call       BACKEND_RESPONSE
    --  TTL            VCL 120 120 0 1481637557
    --  VCL_return     deliver
    --  Storage        malloc s0

It would be interesting to see if a subsequent request to the same URL 
within less than 4 minutes would yield another miss or not.

Regards,

Florian


Am 13. Dezember 2016 15:27:16 schrieb Justin Lloyd <justinl at arena.net>:

> Here’s a typical varnishlog miss for a thumbnail image, appropriately 
> sanitized. I can provide more if it helps
>
> https://gist.github.com/Calygos/ca7906da005569046a7031d1fcaa6372
>
>
> From: Guillaume Quintard [mailto:guillaume at varnish-software.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 12:17 AM
> To: Justin Lloyd <justinl at arena.net>
> Cc: Dridi Boukelmoune <dridi at varni.sh>; varnish-misc at varnish-cache.org
> Subject: Re: Hit ratio dropped significantly after recent upgrades
>
> Can you pastebin the req+bereq transactions in varnishlog, related to such 
> a miss?
>
> --
> Guillaume Quintard
>
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 3:37 AM, Justin Lloyd 
> <justinl at arena.net<mailto:justinl at arena.net>> wrote:
> To follow up on my last email from Friday, at this point the problem boils 
> down to one thing that I've not been able to determine: Why are far fewer 
> things being cached now than before the upgrade?
>
> 1. Cookies don't seem to be the problem. Most appear to be Google Analytics 
> (as opposed to session), which are being unset by vcl_recv.
>
> 2. varnishlog/varnishtop shows many thumbnail URLs being missed and 
> virtually none are requested with a no-cache cache-control header. Is it 
> possible to use these tools determine if they (or any URLs for that matter) 
> are being cached following a miss-deliver sequence? There are about 1.5m 
> thumbnail files totaling around 30 GB, which prior to the upgrades wasn't 
> an issue, and I don't think it is now since there are only a few expires 
> and purges per minute and no nukes at all. Varnish is only using about 2 GB 
> out of the 8 GB allocated to it, where it used to use all 8 GB and have 
> lots of nukes and far fewer expires, so it's not a memory constraint.
>
> Could there be some other resource limitation I'm hitting without knowing 
> it (nothing in any logs I've seen)? Everything else I could think of so far 
> seems fine, e.g. open files, threads, tcp connections.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> varnish-misc-bounces+justinl=arena.net at varnish-cache.org<mailto:arena.net at varnish-cache.org> 
> [mailto:varnish-misc-bounces+justinl<mailto:varnish-misc-bounces%2Bjustinl>=arena.net at varnish-cache.org<mailto:arena.net at varnish-cache.org>] 
> On Behalf Of Justin Lloyd
> Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 11:19 AM
> To: Dridi Boukelmoune <dridi at varni.sh<mailto:dridi at varni.sh>>
> Cc: varnish-misc at varnish-cache.org<mailto:varnish-misc at varnish-cache.org>
> Subject: RE: Hit ratio dropped significantly after recent upgrades
>
> I really am looking at what's happening as well. I have been looking at 
> both varnishlog and varnishtop and I see a lot of thumbnail image requests 
> being sent to the backend when there is still plenty of room for them in 
> the cache, so even though there are a lot of thumbnail images, I shouldn't 
> see so many backend requests for them. As I previously mentioned, I give 
> Varnish 8 GB and it used to stay full (based on RSS usage and looking at 
> nukes vs. expires) but now it hovers around only about 2 GB used. A related 
> statistics is that there used to be 600-700k objects in Varnish (based on 
> our graphs of MAIN.n_object via Collectd's 
> varnish-default-struct.objects-object metric) but now there are only 
> roughly 40-70k objects in Varnish at any given time. So it's definitely 
> caching a lot fewer things than it was before the upgrade, and most of the 
> requested URLs for requests that have cookies are for a lot of images and 
> thumbnails. Images shouldn't be cached due to size and overall volume but 
> thumbnails should, which is why I strip cookies from the thumbnails. These 
> varnishtop commands break out /images and /images/thumb client requests, 
> showing IMHO too many regular images being cached and nowhere near enough 
> thumbnails:
>
> # varnishtop -c -i VCL_call -q 'ReqURL ~ "/images/" and not ReqURL ~ 
> "/images/thumb"'
>
>    349.47 VCL_call       HASH
>    349.47 VCL_call       RECV
>    349.47 VCL_call       DELIVER
>    207.22 VCL_call       HIT
>    116.40 VCL_call       MISS
>    116.30 VCL_call       PASS
>
> # varnishtop -c -i VCL_call -q 'ReqURL ~ "/images/thumb"'
>
>   1859.60 VCL_call       HASH
>   1859.60 VCL_call       RECV
>   1859.60 VCL_call       DELIVER
>   1424.83 VCL_call       MISS
>    422.84 VCL_call       HIT
>    218.82 VCL_call       PASS
>
> I'm still poking around trying to correlate caching of other types of URLs 
> based on whether or not the requests have cookies, if Cache-Control gets 
> returned, etc. but I just wanted to reply with this info. I do appreciate 
> the responses I'm getting! :)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dridi Boukelmoune [mailto:dridi at varni.sh<mailto:dridi at varni.sh>]
> Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 10:11 AM
> To: Justin Lloyd <justinl at arena.net<mailto:justinl at arena.net>>
> Cc: Dag Haavi Finstad 
> <daghf at varnish-software.com<mailto:daghf at varnish-software.com>>; 
> varnish-misc at varnish-cache.org<mailto:varnish-misc at varnish-cache.org>
> Subject: Re: Hit ratio dropped significantly after recent upgrades
>
>> To reiterate on a point in another of my responses in this thread, I think 
>> it may be something about MediaWiki thumbnail images not being cached 
>> properly despite our current VCL in that regard not having changed from how 
>> it worked prior to the upgrade during which time we were seeing a very high 
>> (86%-ish) hit ratio from the same formula.
>
> To reiterate on a point I made on a couple occasions, it's time to give 
> varnishlog a spin. Too much focus on VCL, and not enough on what's happening.
>
> Dridi
> _______________________________________________
> varnish-misc mailing list
> varnish-misc at varnish-cache.org<mailto:varnish-misc at varnish-cache.org>
> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
>
> _______________________________________________
> varnish-misc mailing list
> varnish-misc at varnish-cache.org<mailto:varnish-misc at varnish-cache.org>
> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
>
>
>
> ----------
> _______________________________________________
> varnish-misc mailing list
> varnish-misc at varnish-cache.org
> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc





More information about the varnish-misc mailing list