tis 2012-02-07 klockan 14:01 +1300 skrev Amos Jeffries: > We have a long history of questions and bugs mentioning negative > numbers in the byte hit ratio. > > I've always thought it was a bug we had not tracked down, but the FAQ > says it is correct. > http://wiki.squid-cache.org/SquidFaq/InnerWorkings#Why_do_I_see_negative_byte_hit_ratio.3F
Yes.. it's based on the difference between traffic squid<-servers and clients<-squid. This can be negative (more traffic squid<-servers than clients<-squid) in some situations. - retried requests - range retreival being processed by Squid - continued download after client disconnects (quick_abort_...) > I've discussed this with a professional statistician I work with and > she agrees the algorithm is not calculating hit ratio as per our > definition of what a HIT is. What is does seem to be calculating is a > net traffic GAIN ratio. Yes. > What I propose is make the numbers reported as HIT ratios use the same > algorithm. The current request ratio one. And to add alongside this a > record for Gain/Loss Ratio as output by this byte calculation. Why is it interesting to calculate a nicer but very inaccurate number? To hide that the proxy cache may actually cause higher bandwidth usage than not having the proxy cache? I would argue that the request hit ratio calculation is the broken one from a statistical point of view. Regards Henrik
