Re: [squid-users] Squid-3.1 behaving differently from 2.7.x?
* Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de: * Matus UHLAR - fantomas uh...@fantomas.sk: so the problem was not 3.1 uses too many connections but 2.7 drops connections when it should not. A bit funny ;) I made some more experiments and found out that the problem is between the Squid in front of dansguardian. client - squid_in_front - dansguardian - squid_behind - Internet I was able to replace the squid 2.7.x behind dansguardian with a 3.1.x version without negative impacts (except for frequent crashes). I increased the maximum number of dansguardian processes and found that squid3 would use 297 dansguardian processes, about 2.5 times the number 2.7.x would keep busy. Dunno if that's a good or bad sign. -- Ralf Hildebrandt Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Campus Benjamin Franklin Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962 ralf.hildebra...@charite.de | http://www.charite.de
Re: [squid-users] Squid-3.1 behaving differently from 2.7.x?
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: I'm running squid in this setup: client - squid - dansguardian - squid - teh interwebs When using 2.7-STABLE-7 for both squid instances, I saw about 100 dansguardian processes. Today, after switching both to 3.1.0.14, I'm seeing a constant 252 dansguardian processes (the maximum). Is squid-3.1 somehow keeping connections open to it's parent? * Amos Jeffries squ...@treenet.co.nz: Looks that way. The defaults for persistent connections have not changed between 2.x and 3.x though AFAIK. mån 2009-10-12 klockan 16:48 +0200 skrev Ralf Hildebrandt: Hm. So did 2.7.x use persisten connections? On 13.10.09 01:12, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: Yes. But bug #2451 made it drop the upstream connections a bit too often... fixed in 2.7.STABLE7. so the problem was not 3.1 uses too many connections but 2.7 drops connections when it should not. A bit funny ;) -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. WinError #9: Out of error messages.
Re: [squid-users] Squid-3.1 behaving differently from 2.7.x?
* Matus UHLAR - fantomas uh...@fantomas.sk: so the problem was not 3.1 uses too many connections but 2.7 drops connections when it should not. A bit funny ;) I made some more experiments and found out that the problem is between the Squid in front of dansguardian. client - squid_in_front - dansguardian - squid_behind - Internet I was able to replace the squid 2.7.x behind dansguardian with a 3.1.x version without negative impacts (except for frequent crashes). -- Ralf Hildebrandt Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Campus Benjamin Franklin Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962 ralf.hildebra...@charite.de | http://www.charite.de
Re: [squid-users] Squid-3.1 behaving differently from 2.7.x?
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: * Matus UHLAR - fantomas uh...@fantomas.sk: so the problem was not 3.1 uses too many connections but 2.7 drops connections when it should not. A bit funny ;) I made some more experiments and found out that the problem is between the Squid in front of dansguardian. client - squid_in_front - dansguardian - squid_behind - Internet I was able to replace the squid 2.7.x behind dansguardian with a 3.1.x version without negative impacts (except for frequent crashes). Hmm, now there is a worry! Exact 3.1 version? details of crash? etc, etc. Amos -- Please be using Current Stable Squid 2.7.STABLE7 or 3.0.STABLE19 Current Beta Squid 3.1.0.14
[squid-users] Squid-3.1 behaving differently from 2.7.x?
I'm running squid in this setup: client - squid - dansguardian - squid - teh interwebs When using 2.7-STABLE-7 for both squid instances, I saw about 100 dansguardian processes. Today, after switching both to 3.1.0.14, I'm seeing a constant 252 dansguardian processes (the maximum). Is squid-3.1 somehow keeping connections open to it's parent? -- Ralf Hildebrandt Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Campus Benjamin Franklin Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962 ralf.hildebra...@charite.de | http://www.charite.de
Re: [squid-users] Squid-3.1 behaving differently from 2.7.x?
* Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de: I'm running squid in this setup: client - squid - dansguardian - squid - teh interwebs When using 2.7-STABLE-7 for both squid instances, I saw about 100 dansguardian processes. Today, after switching both to 3.1.0.14, I'm seeing a constant 252 dansguardian processes (the maximum). Is squid-3.1 somehow keeping connections open to it's parent? I also tried 3.0.STABLE19-1, same effect -- Ralf Hildebrandt Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Campus Benjamin Franklin Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962 ralf.hildebra...@charite.de | http://www.charite.de
Re: [squid-users] Squid-3.1 behaving differently from 2.7.x?
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: I'm running squid in this setup: client - squid - dansguardian - squid - teh interwebs When using 2.7-STABLE-7 for both squid instances, I saw about 100 dansguardian processes. Today, after switching both to 3.1.0.14, I'm seeing a constant 252 dansguardian processes (the maximum). Is squid-3.1 somehow keeping connections open to it's parent? Looks that way. The defaults for persistent connections have not changed between 2.x and 3.x though AFAIK. Amos -- Please be using Current Stable Squid 2.7.STABLE7 or 3.0.STABLE19 Current Beta Squid 3.1.0.14
Re: [squid-users] Squid-3.1 behaving differently from 2.7.x?
* Amos Jeffries squ...@treenet.co.nz: Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: I'm running squid in this setup: client - squid - dansguardian - squid - teh interwebs When using 2.7-STABLE-7 for both squid instances, I saw about 100 dansguardian processes. Today, after switching both to 3.1.0.14, I'm seeing a constant 252 dansguardian processes (the maximum). Is squid-3.1 somehow keeping connections open to it's parent? Looks that way. The defaults for persistent connections have not changed between 2.x and 3.x though AFAIK. Hm. So did 2.7.x use persisten connections? -- Ralf Hildebrandt Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Campus Benjamin Franklin Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962 ralf.hildebra...@charite.de | http://www.charite.de
Re: [squid-users] Squid-3.1 behaving differently from 2.7.x?
mån 2009-10-12 klockan 16:48 +0200 skrev Ralf Hildebrandt: * Amos Jeffries squ...@treenet.co.nz: Ralf Hildebrandt wrote: I'm running squid in this setup: client - squid - dansguardian - squid - teh interwebs When using 2.7-STABLE-7 for both squid instances, I saw about 100 dansguardian processes. Today, after switching both to 3.1.0.14, I'm seeing a constant 252 dansguardian processes (the maximum). Is squid-3.1 somehow keeping connections open to it's parent? Looks that way. The defaults for persistent connections have not changed between 2.x and 3.x though AFAIK. Hm. So did 2.7.x use persisten connections? Yes. But bug #2451 made it drop the upstream connections a bit too often... fixed in 2.7.STABLE7. Regards Henrik
