Re: [squid-users] cache hit rate isn't what I'd expect

2017-09-28 Thread Aaron Turner
Here ya go 26/Sep/2017:20:10:27137 10.93.3.47 TCP_HIT/200 11265 GET https://static.licdn.com/sc/h/ddzuq7qeny6qn0ysh3hj6pzmr - HIER_NONE/- 26/Sep/2017:20:10:33 46 10.93.3.47 TCP_MISS/200 11259 GET https://static.licdn.com/sc/h/ddzuq7qeny6qn0ysh3hj6pzmr - HIER_DIRECT/192.229.163.180 26/Sep/2

Re: [squid-users] cache hit rate isn't what I'd expect

2017-09-28 Thread Amos Jeffries
On 29/09/17 11:29, Aaron Turner wrote: So this grep through my access logs for this single URL does a good job illustrating a rather interesting problem: $ grep -h 'https://static.licdn.com/sc/h/ddzuq7qeny6qn0ysh3hj6pzmr text/css ip_index=0,client=m0078269' access.*.log | sort ... > At first

[squid-users] cache hit rate isn't what I'd expect

2017-09-28 Thread Aaron Turner
So this grep through my access logs for this single URL does a good job illustrating a rather interesting problem: $ grep -h 'https://static.licdn.com/sc/h/ddzuq7qeny6qn0ysh3hj6pzmr text/css ip_index=0,client=m0078269' access.*.log | sort 26/Sep/2017:20:10:27 TCP_HIT/200 https://static.licdn.com