Just one minor nitpick, you have more "states" other than cache_hit & cache_miss, look at varnishstat and sum your numbers, for me it's:
MAIN.client_req = MAIN.cache_hit + MAIN.cache_hitpass + MAIN.cache_miss + MAIN.s_synth I don't have s_pipe, so I'm not sure how/if they are counted as client_req/s_req. This should't alter your stats much (if any), but it's an easy thing to correct. Regards. El Mon Dec 01 2014 at 8:23:17, Andrew Langhorn (< [email protected]>) escribió: > I think that depends on all sorts of factors, especially including what > your VCL says to Varnish to consider a hit, miss or pass. > > Let's assume you used defaults, though. Half of the content on your > staging site is being returned by Varnish with no backend calls required. > That seems a good starting point to me. If it's a development site, then > things will be changing a lot all the time I assume and you won't want some > stuff (like auth) cached. If it's an ecommerce site, you'll want even less > cached - eg checkout etc. > > Instead of caring about your hit rate, I'd care more about your miss rate. > These are the requests being sent to origin to respond via Varnish. And > these are the requests that take up resources on your origin. Try to keep > getting that lower, and you should be fine. > > By the way - have you tried varnishstat? It's a good way to get all these > stats out of Varnish. > > > On Monday, 1 December 2014, Tim Dunphy <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hey guys, >> >> We've setup some monitoring on a staging version of a production web >> site at work. It looks like we're getting about a .50 (or 50%) hit rate on >> the staging site. We haven't monitored the production site for varnish hit >> rates yet. We're using a Nagios check written in perl for that. >> >> But if it's possible to think of this in general terms, what I'd like to >> know is if you think that .50 is a respectable hit rate for a php/drupal >> site that's basically not in production, and the traffic it encounters is >> synthetic. Basically it's tested out by the developers and load tests are >> run against it using load generators as you might expect. >> >> And of course, some of the site content is dynamic and not meant to be >> cached. >> >> Here's how it's broken down: >> >> Cache_hit_percent=50.22 >> >> >> cache_hit 222628 >> >> cache_miss 220674 >> >> >> Here's we how calculate cache hit percent >> >> >> cache_hit_percent = ( cache_hit / ( cache_hit + cache_miss ) ) * 100 >> >> >> So all I want to know from the more experienced varnish guys is, would >> you consider this an acceptable cache hit rate given my situation? >> >> >> Thanks >> >> Tim >> >> -- >> GPG me!! >> >> gpg --keyserver pool.sks-keyservers.net --recv-keys F186197B >> >> > > -- > > _______________________________________________ > varnish-misc mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
_______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
