- From: Tai Jin <tai@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 10:23:09 -0700
- To: Chris.Hull@fmr.com
- Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com, ircache@nlanr.net
> That's what I'm seeing as well. The best I could hope for would be > 37% of the URLs, which would account for 48% of the data. And this > assumes that none of the pages have expired (which I can't easily > see from the logs) within the week. > > What I did notice that as the number of logs analyzed increase, the > potential hit rates did get better. When I looked at one day, I > calculated that I should only be able to get a 28% hit rate(URLs). > With two days data in cache, I should be able to get a 33% hit > rate. One week - 37%. > > The relationship is not linear with respect to time, and I expect > to see diminishing returns, but I imagine that if the cache is > large enough to store all accesses for a month, the hit rate would > increase even higher. I could try to analyze a month's worth of Of course, it depends on how long you set your TTLs and how long ago the modified times are. I suspect that with longer TTLs you'll see more IMS and REFRESH requests (due to users hitting the reload button), which is actually not a bad thing since you're still saving bandwidth over a clean MISS. ...tai
Received on Tuesday, 20 August 1996 10:24:59 UTC