Personally, I think 8 cores is most likely overkill unless you've got
some seriously cpu-intensive helper apps - squid on its own tends to
block on I/O far earlier than it blocks on CPU. You're more likely to
get more bang for the buck by going with 4 cores and extra RAM which
the kernel wi
I use 8 cores CPU for ISP level Squids. Squid's external apps like DNS
resolvers, I/O (especially if you use aufs/diskd/coss), logging, it's
always a good idea to get more than 4 cores so Squid wouldn't lock for
long on these external apps to reply back to the main process.
On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at
On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 02:20:47AM -0700, elsergio wrote:
> Which option is better for using Squid as a Load Balancer?
>
> a) Multi thread processor.
> b) Non Multi thread processor.
Non multi-thread/core processor is only to be preferred if you can
get a faster processor at the same price, i.e.
Hi all,
Which option is better for using Squid as a Load Balancer?
a) Multi thread processor.
b) Non Multi thread processor.
Thanks!
Sergio
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Multi-thread-or-Not-multi-thread-processor-tp19251425p19251425.html
Sent from the Squid - Users m
