Re: Another COSS patch
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006, Steven Wilton wrote: > As promised, I've added a WIKI page in the FAQ section. Nice, thanks! Adrian
Re: Another COSS patch
- Original Message - From: "Steven Wilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Guido Serassio'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Adrian Chadd'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 8:25 AM Subject: RE: Another COSS patch >What would be good now is a "configuration guide" for COSS just so people >have some idea of how to configure, use, troubleshoot and tune it. >COSS has quite a lot more knobs now than it did when i inherited it and >its bound to generate a lot of questions once people realise it performs >better than UFS. A wiki page :-) I'll give it a shot. As promised, I've added a WIKI page in the FAQ section. Steven
Re: Another COSS patch
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006, Steven Wilton wrote: > > > Have you looked at the documentation update Reuben sent? > > > > Yup; then Steven went off and tweaked it all again! > > > > I'm not sure what document you're referring to. Is there another document > that should be updated? Or is the wiki the best place? He sent a config file snippet to squid-dev a couple weeks ago. Adrian
RE: Another COSS patch
> -Original Message- > From: Adrian Chadd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, 15 August 2006 5:28 PM > To: Henrik Nordstrom > Cc: Adrian Chadd; Steven; squid-dev@squid-cache.org > Subject: Re: Another COSS patch > > On Tue, Aug 15, 2006, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 17:00 +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > > > > What would be good now is a "configuration guide" for > COSS just so people > > > have some idea of how to configure, use, troubleshoot and tune it. > > > COSS has quite a lot more knobs now than it did when i > inherited it and > > > its bound to generate a lot of questions once people > realise it performs > > > better than UFS. > > > > Have you looked at the documentation update Reuben sent? > > Yup; then Steven went off and tweaked it all again! > I'm not sure what document you're referring to. Is there another document that should be updated? Or is the wiki the best place? Regards Steven -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.10.10/419 - Release Date: 15/08/2006
Re: Another COSS patch
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 17:00 +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > > What would be good now is a "configuration guide" for COSS just so people > > have some idea of how to configure, use, troubleshoot and tune it. > > COSS has quite a lot more knobs now than it did when i inherited it and > > its bound to generate a lot of questions once people realise it performs > > better than UFS. > > Have you looked at the documentation update Reuben sent? Yup; then Steven went off and tweaked it all again! Adrian
Re: Another COSS patch
On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 17:00 +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > What would be good now is a "configuration guide" for COSS just so people > have some idea of how to configure, use, troubleshoot and tune it. > COSS has quite a lot more knobs now than it did when i inherited it and > its bound to generate a lot of questions once people realise it performs > better than UFS. Have you looked at the documentation update Reuben sent? Regards Henrik
RE: Another COSS patch
> >What would be good now is a "configuration guide" for COSS > just so people > >have some idea of how to configure, use, troubleshoot and tune it. > >COSS has quite a lot more knobs now than it did when i > inherited it and > >its bound to generate a lot of questions once people realise > it performs > >better than UFS. > > A wiki page :-) I'll give it a shot. > Steven, Adrian a question for you: > > I have waited the ending of your COSS work before do a Windows port > using native Windows overlapped I/O. Now it seems to me that the COSS > code is really close to its definitive structure. > Do you can confirm this, or there are still some enhancement pending ? I've got no further work planned for COSS at the moment. The only thing is that we are still seeing "WARNING: failed to unpack meta data" entries in our cache log after restarting squid with COSS partitions. These do not appear to cause any problems, but their cause does need to be investigated. Regards Steven -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.10.9/417 - Release Date: 11/08/2006
Re: Another COSS patch
Hi, At 11.00 14/08/2006, Adrian Chadd wrote: On Mon, Aug 14, 2006, Steven wrote: > > Ar there any objections to me committing the attached patch for COSS in > squid 2.6. I've been running this patch for the past week on one of our > caches, and it appears to be working well. Its fine by me. What would be good now is a "configuration guide" for COSS just so people have some idea of how to configure, use, troubleshoot and tune it. COSS has quite a lot more knobs now than it did when i inherited it and its bound to generate a lot of questions once people realise it performs better than UFS. A wiki page :-) Steven, Adrian a question for you: I have waited the ending of your COSS work before do a Windows port using native Windows overlapped I/O. Now it seems to me that the COSS code is really close to its definitive structure. Do you can confirm this, or there are still some enhancement pending ? Regards Guido - Guido Serassio Acme Consulting S.r.l. - Microsoft Certified Partner Via Lucia Savarino, 1 10098 - Rivoli (TO) - ITALY Tel. : +39.011.9530135 Fax. : +39.011.9781115 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.acmeconsulting.it/
Re: Another COSS patch
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006, Steven wrote: > > Ar there any objections to me committing the attached patch for COSS in > squid 2.6. I've been running this patch for the past week on one of our > caches, and it appears to be working well. Its fine by me. What would be good now is a "configuration guide" for COSS just so people have some idea of how to configure, use, troubleshoot and tune it. COSS has quite a lot more knobs now than it did when i inherited it and its bound to generate a lot of questions once people realise it performs better than UFS. Adrian
