Re: [squid-users] Hypothetically comparing SATA\SAS to NAS\SAN for squid.
Hey Omid, Before buying any NAS or SAN solution you will need to take in account couple things. Squid has an in memory objects index which requires ram and reduces the amount of in memory objects you can store. You will need to first verify that your current machine memory usage can allow you to grow your storage. 250GB*4 can store lots of small objects and there is a chance that you will want to utilize more then what your machine can take. I do not remember the exact numbers for the right calculation so others can help with that. The specific NAS\SAN solution you mentioned is good and it uses windows storage server and the best choice of use with this solution is using ISCSI. From what I have seen it is using VHD files and not bare disks for anything. The main thing about this storage device is the ease of use. If it fits your needs and requirements then great. Another benefit is the HOT-SWAP bay but you will need to verify first how the RAID solution is implemented, in the OS level or another. I do not know what are the local prices for hardware and software at your place but I know that HP has microservers with a similar intel ATOM cpu and more ram in other prices(the OS costs about 220$). RAM is important for storage solutions of any kind,type and OS!!! For squid a NAS(NFS\CIFS) needs to be tested more before production usage and a SAN is preferable. Have you considered using a more recent version of squid? What OS are you running? Eliezer On 04/02/2015 08:24, Omid Kosari wrote: The only reason for extend is more capacity . Currently there is no problem with current setup except capacity . I can replace each SSD with new 500GB which doubles the capacity and it is not enough . and old SSDs will be unusable . So i prefer a long term solution like NAS . Current spec of squid boxes are core i3 (with current 3.1.20 version one core utilizes) and 16GB of ram . so far so good . ___ squid-users mailing list squid-users@lists.squid-cache.org http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
Re: [squid-users] Hypothetically comparing SATA\SAS to NAS\SAN for squid.
On 02/04/2015 04:24 AM, Omid Kosari wrote: The only reason for extend is more capacity . Currently there is no problem with current setup except capacity . I can replace each SSD with new 500GB which doubles the capacity and it is not enough . and old SSDs will be unusable . So i prefer a long term solution like NAS . Yes, a NAS will do. I assume that you will put disks in the NAS (instead of SSDs) so it is recommended to configure Squid to use the SSDs for small objects and the NAS for large objects since disks more efficient in servicing larger objects than small objects. Since you have 300 mbit traffic and internal SSDs, a 1 gbit port for the NAS is sufficient, so 10 gbit is not required. Depending on the current config you might need to use a separate NIC for the NAS. Make sure that the NAS that you will buy is compatible with your system since the link to the specs that you sent earlier is to a Windows-only NAS. Marcus Current spec of squid boxes are core i3 (with current 3.1.20 version one core utilizes) and 16GB of ram . so far so good . -- View this message in context: http://squid-web-proxy-cache.1019090.n4.nabble.com/Hypothetically-comparing-SATA-SAS-to-NAS-SAN-for-squid-tp4664350p4669531.html Sent from the Squid - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ squid-users mailing list squid-users@lists.squid-cache.org http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users ___ squid-users mailing list squid-users@lists.squid-cache.org http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
Re: [squid-users] Hypothetically comparing SATA\SAS to NAS\SAN for squid.
The only reason for extend is more capacity . Currently there is no problem with current setup except capacity . I can replace each SSD with new 500GB which doubles the capacity and it is not enough . and old SSDs will be unusable . So i prefer a long term solution like NAS . Current spec of squid boxes are core i3 (with current 3.1.20 version one core utilizes) and 16GB of ram . so far so good . -- View this message in context: http://squid-web-proxy-cache.1019090.n4.nabble.com/Hypothetically-comparing-SATA-SAS-to-NAS-SAN-for-squid-tp4664350p4669531.html Sent from the Squid - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ squid-users mailing list squid-users@lists.squid-cache.org http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
Re: [squid-users] Hypothetically comparing SATA\SAS to NAS\SAN for squid.
On 03/02/2015 16:56, Omid Kosari wrote: Squidbox1: Average HTTP requests per minute since start:16000 Squidbox2: Average HTTP requests per minute since start:11000 About 300Mbit of bandwidth (Only http bandwidth which routed to squid boxes) What is the hardware specs of these squid boxes? CPU? RAM? Eliezer ___ squid-users mailing list squid-users@lists.squid-cache.org http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
Re: [squid-users] Hypothetically comparing SATA\SAS to NAS\SAN for squid.
On 02/03/2015 12:56 PM, Omid Kosari wrote: Squidbox1: Average HTTP requests per minute since start:16000 Squidbox2: Average HTTP requests per minute since start:11000 16000 request/min = 266 requests/sec. With a well-tuned Squid system I estimate that the disk I/O is less than 2000 IOPS and the current SSDs should be able to cope with that. So speed should not be an issue. Why do you want to extend? Is it only to extend the disk cache capacity? What is are specs of the current SSDs ? It is worthwile to replace them with new SSDs with higher performance/capacity ? About 300Mbit of bandwidth (Only http bandwidth which routed to squid boxes) Right now squid boxes have 4 250GB SSD and there is no more free sata slots on them . I want to use SAN/NAS to extend their capacity . No i don't have free NAS/SAN but somebody has a 2bay model of following model and suggest me half price http://www.seagate.com/files/www-content/support-content/external-products/blackarmor-nas/_shared/docs/business-nas-guides/Seagate_NAS_Admin_Guide_EN.pdf The PDF points to a Windows-only based NAS ! and found a review. i am not sure it is for same model http://www.storagereview.com/seagate_business_storage_windows_server_4bay_nas_review Is it useful for my purpose ? Or please provide general specs that i should be aware before buy . Marcus ___ squid-users mailing list squid-users@lists.squid-cache.org http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
Re: [squid-users] Hypothetically comparing SATA\SAS to NAS\SAN for squid.
Squidbox1: Average HTTP requests per minute since start:16000 Squidbox2: Average HTTP requests per minute since start:11000 About 300Mbit of bandwidth (Only http bandwidth which routed to squid boxes) Right now squid boxes have 4 250GB SSD and there is no more free sata slots on them . I want to use SAN/NAS to extend their capacity . No i don't have free NAS/SAN but somebody has a 2bay model of following model and suggest me half price http://www.seagate.com/files/www-content/support-content/external-products/blackarmor-nas/_shared/docs/business-nas-guides/Seagate_NAS_Admin_Guide_EN.pdf and found a review. i am not sure it is for same model http://www.storagereview.com/seagate_business_storage_windows_server_4bay_nas_review Is it useful for my purpose ? Or please provide general specs that i should be aware before buy . -- View this message in context: http://squid-web-proxy-cache.1019090.n4.nabble.com/Hypothetically-comparing-SATA-SAS-to-NAS-SAN-for-squid-tp4664350p4669503.html Sent from the Squid - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ squid-users mailing list squid-users@lists.squid-cache.org http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
Re: [squid-users] Hypothetically comparing SATA\SAS to NAS\SAN for squid.
Hey Omid, I do not have benchmarks. I was actually in the past looking at GlusterFS and NFS for couple purposes. The Gigabit and 10Gb have their difference. The main big thing is that a simple SATA\SAS jack\connector\port supports up to 6Gb and in most cases the machine will not utilize even 1Gb per port\disk. If you do ask me about a comparison about ISCSI vs nfs vs glusterfs I would grade NFS as the best for lots of files while glusterfs is better for big files. An ISCSI partition benefits are VFS in memory objects which eventually reduce access time compared to glusterfs and NFS. I have tested glusterfs as a backend for a hypervisor and a local SSD drive was faster. Do you have anything you think about Omid? if you have a scenario in hand I would like hear about it. Eliezer On 03/02/2015 14:45, Omid Kosari wrote: @Eliezer , Any benchmark ? This topic is very important for me . ___ squid-users mailing list squid-users@lists.squid-cache.org http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
Re: [squid-users] Hypothetically comparing SATA\SAS to NAS\SAN for squid.
Hi Omid, The I/O requirements can be estimated well if you tell more about the environment. If you know the number of requests/second that Squid prcoesses you can add a percentage to increase performance and calculate the desired I/Os per second (IOPS). When you have the desired IOPS, you can calculate if 1 gbit is enough. NFS has relatively much overhead, so I recommend a NAS with iSCSI or a SAN. What kind of SAN/NAS did you have in mind ? Do you already have a SAN or NAS ? Marcus On 02/03/2015 10:45 AM, Omid Kosari wrote: How we can test this ? What protocol suggested for Squid ? NFS, iSCSI,... ? Apart from bandwidth, is there any important difference between 1Gbit ethernet and 10G ? Do you suggest me to buy 1Gbit storage and monitor it or you think the money will be wasted ? Any news about this REALLY interesting thread ? @Eliezer , Any benchmark ? This topic is very important for me . -- View this message in context: http://squid-web-proxy-cache.1019090.n4.nabble.com/Hypothetically-comparing-SATA-SAS-to-NAS-SAN-for-squid-tp4664350p4669494.html Sent from the Squid - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ squid-users mailing list squid-users@lists.squid-cache.org http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users ___ squid-users mailing list squid-users@lists.squid-cache.org http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
Re: [squid-users] Hypothetically comparing SATA\SAS to NAS\SAN for squid.
How we can test this ? What protocol suggested for Squid ? NFS, iSCSI,... ? Apart from bandwidth, is there any important difference between 1Gbit ethernet and 10G ? Do you suggest me to buy 1Gbit storage and monitor it or you think the money will be wasted ? Any news about this REALLY interesting thread ? @Eliezer , Any benchmark ? This topic is very important for me . -- View this message in context: http://squid-web-proxy-cache.1019090.n4.nabble.com/Hypothetically-comparing-SATA-SAS-to-NAS-SAN-for-squid-tp4664350p4669494.html Sent from the Squid - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ squid-users mailing list squid-users@lists.squid-cache.org http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
