Re: "Hits" pragma

On Fri, 11 Aug 1995, Paul Burchard wrote:
> Brian Behlendorf <> writes:
> > One thing that would encourage the use of Expires:
> > headers of course would be a way for caches to report hits
> > they served directly without a long-distance conditional GET.
> How about using an additional pragma directive
> 	Pragma: hits = 35
> to denote the accumulated number of unforwarded requests received  
> by a proxy, in addition to the request being forwarded.  Multiple  
> "hits" directives make sense, and can be accumulated by intermediate  
> proxies.
> Using this pragma, hit counts will be accurate over time intervals  
> on the order of the expiration interval of the resource (which is  
> tunable by the server).

So for every piece of data in the proxy, the server will have to maintain 
a counter on number of accesses, to be sent when the document expires.  
This is about halfway there - *every* client of ours wants stats as to 
the busiest time of day for their sites (even to particular parts of 
their site) and it doesn't let us analyse "clickstreams" using either 
pathway heuristics or RequestID info.[1]

It would be more useful to the server if it gave a more detailed report, 
even if it's just a list of RequestID's, timestamps, and Referrers.  
UserAgent would be marginally useful as well... perhaps a configurable 
format the server could give an an HTTP header on the original attribute?
Yes, this means more bandwidth at the reload time, but it's still less 
than all those separate connections.

What would the proxy administrator get out of this?  Well, the more info 
that can be forwarded, the more likely content providers will start 
putting useful Expires in their documents.  Web protocols of course 
should not be designed around "who's more selfish", but hopefully there's 
a common ground that can be reached.

> This proposal requires only minimal changes to caches, servers, and  
> log analysis tools -- and offers a graceful, incremental upgrade  
> path  in the meantime (since Pragma headers are already passed  
> through by any conforming proxy).  Performance of all components is  
> practically unchanged since no additional network connections are  
> used.  And perhaps most important for successful adoption, this  
> scheme avoids imposing any burdensome reporting duties (such as  
> "accounting batch runs") on proxy maintainers.

I think this still holds....


--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--  http://www.[hyperreal,organic].com/

Received on Saturday, 12 August 1995 16:06:58 UTC