Time to replace the hit ratio with something more intuitive?

Michael Fischer michael at dynamine.net
Tue Jan 19 22:50:53 CET 2010

On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Rob S <rtshilston at gmail.com> wrote:

> Michael Fischer wrote:
>  On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Nils Goroll <slink at schokola.de <mailto:
>> slink at schokola.de>> wrote:
>>    I am suggesting to amend (or replace ?) this figure by a ratio of
>>    client
>>    requests being handled by the cache by total number of requests.
>>    In other words,
>>    a measure for how many of the client requests do not result in a
>>    backend request.
>> I vote for the replacement option.  In my view, the ratio should be (total
>> requests)/(requests satisfied from cache).
> That'd give odd figures (eg 1.25), when you'd expect to see 0.8.  Can we
> flip it the other way up?

Oops!  Yes.

I'd also caution against replacing, as people may have monitoring against
> the old figures...

Well, under the current regime, the figures may lead to a false sense of
complacency since the hit ratio may be falsely high.  If changing it causes
additional alerts to be raised, they probably needed to know all along. :)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/pipermail/varnish-misc/attachments/20100119/f5be72a4/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the varnish-misc mailing list