A customer has a website with 10,000 pages and wants to improve performance. Which option should be used?

Question

Options

• ASpecify a wildcard allow rule in the invalidate section
• BAdvise to use URL parameters instead of sling selectors
• CDecrease .stat file level from the default
• DIncrease .stat file level from the default

• A
  9% (4)
• B
  85% (40)
• C
  4% (2)
• D
  2% (1)

Explanation

Using URL parameters instead of Sling selectors directly addresses the root performance problem: Sling selectors become part of the file path in the Dispatcher cache (e.g., page.selector1.selector2.html), creating an exponential number of cached file variants across 10,000 pages. URL parameters (query strings), by contrast, are ignored by the Dispatcher for cache lookups by default, so all parameter variations resolve to the same cached file - drastically reducing cache size and invalidation overhead.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• A (wildcard allow in invalidate): Broadening the invalidation scope means more cached files get flushed on each publish event, making performance worse, not better.
• C (decrease .stat file level): A lower .stat level causes broader cache invalidation - touching closer to the root means a single publish event can invalidate the entire cache of all 10,000 pages. This is the opposite of what you want.
• D (increase .stat file level): While increasing the level does improve invalidation granularity (a valid tuning approach), it doesn't fix the underlying file-explosion problem caused by selectors. The question asks for the best option for a site this large, and B addresses the root cause.

Memory tip: Think of Sling selectors as creating new files in the cache, and URL parameters as notes attached to the same file. With 10,000 pages, you want notes, not new files.

No community discussion yet for this question.