On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Dave Taht <dave.t...@gmail.com> wrote: > I would certainly like to have a standard way of getting these > statistics, through the dns, perhaps one unified with whatever bind > and unbound use (or don't use.) > > Not a lot of people seem to be aware of why dns caching forwarders are > so great, although benchmarks like namebench against your chrome or > firefox cache are quite revealing, parsing huge network captures as > I am presently to try to get a grip on timings for dns/response > pairing is a pita and not router centric. > > However: > > Do check out namebench, it's pretty cool. It does bug me that in tests > against the alexa top 2000 that it invariably selects some other dns > server besides your local one as being the "best", because it has > the best average - as if you regularly go to websites in timbuktu and > care about the response time more than, say, google. > > Example against alexa top 2000 with a fresh cache: > > http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/namebench/namebench_2014-03-20_1255.html > > It is much better to test against your more common query set, which I > don't have a snapshot of on that site presently - usually 40% or more > of queries are resolved in a ms, 30% or so via your ISP in under 20ms. > > I'd love to see people posting namebench results from against their > firefox/chrome caches... it's in apt on ubuntu at least.... > > the version I have is buggy, you have to hit control-C at least once > for the gui to come up.
I just did a namebench test against my local firefox cache (without clearing dnsmasq's caches) http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/namebench/namebench_2014-03-24_1541.html note that I have three dns servers in place - one on my local machine, a dnsmasq locally that is sending stuff over ipv6 to another dnsmasq which is then connected over ipv4 and ipv6 to comcasts forwarders. > > > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Simon Kelley <si...@thekelleys.org.uk> wrote: >> On 24/03/14 11:25, Olivier Mauras wrote: >>> >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I was wondering what would be the effort, and if there'd >>> actually be any interest for some dnsmasq statistics improvements. (Yes >>> i'm splitting dicussions ^^) >>> For monitoring/graph purposes, actual >>> dnsmasq stats are a bit difficult to use and completely unusable if >>> using "log_queries" as it takes too long to retrieve them inside >>> logs. >>> >>> I'd love to see a stats "interface" that would output >>> total_queries, cache_hits, cache_misses, memory used by cache, >>> etc.... >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Olivier >>> >> >> There's an idea to make this available as a DNS query, in the same way that >> >> >> dig chaos txt version.bind >> >> returns the version number. >> >> Comments? >> >> Cheers, >> >> Simon. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list >> Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk >> http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss > > > > -- > Dave Täht > > Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: > http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html -- Dave Täht Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html _______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss