Brion Vibber wrote:
Please take a look at the parser cache and see if it's missing any needed functionality.
What are the current cache hit/miss rates like? I wrote the last post based on the premise that memcached only makes it possible to cache a fraction of the article space, still making the parser churn quite a bit, making people unhappy. If this is not the case, what are people complaining about?
With another database as opposed to memcached, it's possible to literally reduce things to one parser hit per edit, for all languages. The parser would then need to be *really* slow for anyone to notice a performance penalty, no?
Cheers, Ivan.