[plug] Proxy Cache Hit Rate

[Onno Benschop]

Well, that seems to be 100% agreement among all the on and off list replies
I received.

Thank you.
--
finger painting on glass is an inexact art - apologies for any errors in
this scra^Hibble

()/)/)() ..ASCII for Onno..
On Dec 22, 2015 10:49 PM, "David Godfrey" <info at sbts.com.au> wrote:

> I agree,
>
> for a common use case a proxy may now be a liability.
> However an intelligent proxy like Varnish, may still be of huge benefit
> in the right scenarios.
> In particular as a frontend proxy local to a busy website with lots of
> fairly static content (eg: a drupal site)
>
> If Varnish is running on the same physical network as the site it is
> proxying I believe Varnish can provide the https layer with the drupal
> server plain http without compromising security.
>
> There is plenty of evidence that for high traffic sites service fairly
> static content there are massive speed improvements and load handling
> capability improvements to be had.
>
> Varnish is also good at horizontal scaling by allowing multiple low cost
> hardware systems (with lots of ram) to serve more client connections
> than the primary server could hope to manage.
>
> There are plenty of articles about Varnish out there, but if you can't
> find them let me know. I think I may have one or two bookmarked on
> another sytem.
>
> Of course, this is a different use case from a home or business user
> running a proxy in an attempt to reduce traffic over their ISP's network
>
> Regards
> David G
>
> On 22/12/15 19:41, Brad Campbell wrote:
> > On 22/12/15 16:32, Bill Kenworthy wrote:
> >> On 22/12/15 16:17, Onno Benschop wrote:
> >>> Quick survey:
> >>>
> >>> If you manage or have access to a proxy cache server, what is your
> >>> current cache hit rate?
> >>>
> >>> Background:
> >>>
> >>> I've just been told they're obsolete and a waste of time since the hit
> >>> rate is low and all it does is add latency. Suffice to say, I'm not
> >>> convinced :-)
> >
> >>
> >> Be convinced ...
> >>
> >> I dropped squid as a proxy nearly 4 years ago now for just that reason.
> >>   The more https traffic you have, the less useful it is and it does add
> >> latency. The hit rate was getting"miserable" even back then.
> >>
> >
> > Seconded. The advent of https for everything has decimated the
> > efficiency of a proxy. I still use one but only because I've been too
> > lazy to get rid of it, and I use it as a blocking filter for a load of
> > stuff (like a gazillion url's Windows 10 uses to update and report home).
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > PLUG discussion list: plug at plug.org.au
> > http://lists.plug.org.au/mailman/listinfo/plug
> > Committee e-mail: committee at plug.org.au
> > PLUG Membership: http://www.plug.org.au/membership
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PLUG discussion list: plug at plug.org.au
> http://lists.plug.org.au/mailman/listinfo/plug
> Committee e-mail: committee at plug.org.au
> PLUG Membership: http://www.plug.org.au/membership
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plug.org.au/pipermail/plug/attachments/20151223/d2b81d71/attachment.html>