Hi!
I agree, we should look at some actual traffic to see
how many queries
/could/ be cached in a 2/5/10/60 min window. Maybe remove the example
queries from those numbers, to separate the "production" and testing
usage. Also, look at query runtime; if only "cheap" queries would be
cached, there is no point in caching.
Makes sense, but some of the use cases are not implemented yet, and I'm
kind of scared of allowing them without caching - e.g. graph embedding -
so it's hard to rely on past data.
Once you run a query, you know both the runtime and
the result size.
Maybe expensive queries with a huge result set could be cached longer by
default, and cheap/small queries not at all? If you expect your recent
Wikidata edit to change the results from 3 to 4, you should see that
ASAP; if the change would be 50.000 to 50.001, it seems less critical
somehow.
That sounds like a good idea, we'll need to check if Varnish allows us
to do tricks like this...
--
Stas Malyshev
smalyshev(a)wikimedia.org