Hi, Am Samstag, 7. Oktober 2006 01:01 schrieb toad: > 1. THE STORE IS *LESS* EFFECTIVE THAN THE CACHE! > > ------------------------------------------------ > > Please could people post their store statistics? Cache hits, store hits, > cached keys, stored keys. > > So far: > [23:11] <nextgens> # Cached keys: 6,389 (199 MiB) > [23:11] <nextgens> # Stored keys: 24,550 (767 MiB) > [23:09] <nextgens> # Cache hits: 217 / 12,738 (1%) > [23:09] <nextgens> # Store hits: 14 / 10,818 (0%) > > (Cached hits / cached keys) / (Stored hits / stored keys) = 59.56 [...]
My statistics: ------- Cached keys: 1,121,346 (~34.2 GiB) Cache hits: 138,092 / 166,603 (82%) Stored keys: 15,304 (~478 MiB) Store hits: 1,202 / 160,002 (0%) ------- This is funny, all the statistics posted so far seem to indicate that the cache is using several magnitudes more space than the store. Shouldn't it be the other way around? Also, what's with this line: ------- Overall size: 1,136,650/2,194,293 (~34.6 GiB/66.9 GiB) ------- I've configured my node for a maximum store size of 40 GiB. This line seems to indicate that it might use up to 66.9 GiB at some point. This would be a problem for me, as the partition I've installed freenet on isn't even large enough for that. -- Mailing list archives are not a proper form of documentation.
