Matt Buford wrote: > > What you have to understand about Skycache is that it completely corrupts > your hit count. It presents itself as a client to the cache, requesting > many pages. These requests from the skycache box are counted as client > requests in your statistics (unless you specifically remove them), thus any > indication of hit ratio is false. The only way to get true indication of > how much it helps would be to grep out all the skycache activity from the > logs, then run a report on what is left. > > Many people seem to set up skycache then they look in their cache manager > for the hit rate, which is completely corrupted from the skycache feed > process... > SkyCache provides you with a perl reporting tool to qualify the effectiveness of their feed (i.e. percentage of requests which ended as HITs because they were previously fed via satellite) as well as a patch to squid to compensate for misleading hit rate infos (see ftp.skycache.com). Hitrate obviously highly depends on your setup. For us, it's quite worth it. Markus
begin:vcard n:Storm;Markus tel;fax:++49 +5241 80-67867 x-mozilla-html:FALSE org:mediaWays GmbH;NTM-T adr:;;;G�tersloh;;33311;Germany version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] x-mozilla-cpt:;-18624 fn:Markus Storm end:vcard
