I would have expected LRU to perform better than that. :-( -Jason
On Apr 27, 2012, at 7:09 PM, Bryan Call <bc...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote: > I wanted to know if anyone else has done testing on comparing how clfus and > lru perform for real world traffic. > > I noticed that a server using clfus and didn't have the cache filled was > getting a higher ram cache hit rate then a server that had the cache full. > That lead me to do a test with lru and clfus in production. All I did was > switch the configuration option on one box and wait for the cache to fill up. > The server running lru was getting 1/2 the ram cache misses. Also, this was > confirmed by the amount of disk access the clfus server was doing to grab > objects from the disk cache. > > -Bryan >
