trafficserver-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Adam W. Dace" <colonelforbi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Best practices for hit ratio improve
Date Sat, 12 Jul 2014 01:45:22 GMT
Huh.  I'll try not to do that long-term, this really is just an experiment.

Maybe this once more has to do with me using Firefox not Chrome in the past.

I've just never been able to get past 64MB of "Ram Used" in
traffic_top...hoping to give Traffic Server a nice gigabyte or two of RAM
in the future.


On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zwoop@apache.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Jul 11, 2014, at 2:18 PM, "Adam W. Dace" <colonelforbin74@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I've actually been experimenting with this a bit myself.
>
> Over time I've been frustrated by the fact that Traffic Server doesn't
> seem to want to use its RAM cache much, on a system with very little load.
>
> Here's my current cache.config:
> url_regex=\.(js|gif|jpg|jpeg|png|svg|css|ico|bmp|swf|flv|html|pdf)$
> scheme=http ttl-in-cache=60d
> url_regex=.* scheme=http revalidate=1d
>
> Does this really help?  I'm not really the one to ask, though it does seem
> to make things a bit faster...and my RAM usage is up.
>
>
>
> I'm sure this helps, but a forward proxy you are clearly violating the
> protocol :).
>
> As for RAM cache, it's simply a mapping over disk blocks. I don't
> understand why it would not use all RAM you give it.
>
>
>
> I've also been documenting how I tune Traffic Server on a personal basis,
> feel free to check it out at WebProxyCacheTuning
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TS/WebProxyCacheTuning>.
> At this point I'm pretty sure I'm done tweaking Traffic Server v5.0.
>
> Regards,
>
> Adam
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zwoop@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 7, 2014, at 12:59 PM, Luís Antonio Pereira <
>> luis.a.pereira@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all
>> >
>> > I would like to improve the performance of my webcache, for example
>> > for example implementing the pining/cache.config:
>> >
>> > On records.config:
>> > CONFIG proxy.config.cache.permit.pinning INT 1
>>
>>
>> Before you go there, I’d seriously investigate your cache and content.
>> Some thoughts
>>
>> 1. Is your cache not large enough? How large is your active data content?
>> Disks are fairly cheap, pinning is not (looking at your rules, I think
>> you’ll kill your performance completely).
>>
>> 2. Do you have adequate RAM ?
>>
>> 3. What evidence is there to make you think pinning actually makes things
>> better? Maybe what you are really looking for is to allocate some amount of
>> the disks for Facebook content only ? This can be done with volume.config /
>> hosting.config.
>>
>> 4. Are you sure you are not mixing up the notion of Cache-Control:
>> max-age with pinning?
>>
>>
>>
>> In almost all cases I’ve seen ATS use, the cache does a great job on its
>> own. Messing with things like cache pinning ought to be a last resort IMO,
>> for some very specific use cases. I don’t think this is one of those.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> — Leif
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ____________________________________________________________
> Adam W. Dace <colonelforbin74@gmail.com>
>
> Phone: (815) 355-5848
> Instant Messenger: AIM & Yahoo! IM - colonelforbin74 | ICQ - #39374451
> Microsoft Messenger - colonelforbin74@live.com <adam@turing.com>
>
> Google Profile: https://plus.google.com/u/0/109309036874332290399/about
>
>


-- 
____________________________________________________________
Adam W. Dace <colonelforbin74@gmail.com>

Phone: (815) 355-5848
Instant Messenger: AIM & Yahoo! IM - colonelforbin74 | ICQ - #39374451
Microsoft Messenger - colonelforbin74@live.com <adam@turing.com>

Google Profile: https://plus.google.com/u/0/109309036874332290399/about

Mime
View raw message