Hello All,
I am in the process of patching Squid 2.6 icap with Squid-2.6.STABLE10
version.
Squid 2.6 icap patch is taken from
http://devel.squid-cache.org/cgi-bin/diff2/icap-2_6.patch
I had one rejection in client_side.c and i had done that change manually.
But when i issue the command 'm
selvi wrote:
Hello All,
I am in the process of patching Squid 2.6 icap with Squid-2.6.STABLE10
version.
Have you tried Squid 3.0 stable 1 ? It incorporates ICAP natively
amongst other improvements.
Amos
--
Please use Squid 2.6STABLE17+ or 3.0STABLE1+
There are serious security advisories o
Yes, I had already tried that.
But since, i had heard that Squid 2.6 version had better performance
than Squid 3.0, i would like to try that also as a backup.
Thanks
Selvi
Amos Jeffries wrote:
selvi wrote:
Hello All,
I am in the process of patching Squid 2.6 icap with
Squid-2.6.STABLE10
* Christos Tsantilas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > But since, i had heard that Squid 2.6 version had better performance
> > than Squid 3.0, i would like to try that also as a backup.
>
> Squid 3 is enough fast for most cases. You will not see any difference in
> performance unless you have a very-very
Hi Selvi,
>
> Yes, I had already tried that.
>
> But since, i had heard that Squid 2.6 version had better performance
> than Squid 3.0, i would like to try that also as a backup.
Squid 3 is enough fast for most cases. You will not see any difference in
performance unless you have a very-very busy
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Christos Tsantilas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
But since, i had heard that Squid 2.6 version had better performance
than Squid 3.0, i would like to try that also as a backup.
Squid 3 is enough fast for most cases. You will not see any difference in
performance unless you hav
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> I had Adrian benchmark 3.x recently. With his specific RAM-pathways test.
>
> The cutoff for speed seems to be Squid3 reaching 500-650 req/sec and
> Squid 2.6 going past that into the 800-900 req/sec ranges. At a few
> hundred concurrent requests.
h
Amos Jeffries wrote:
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Christos Tsantilas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
But since, i had heard that Squid 2.6 version had better performance
than Squid 3.0, i would like to try that also as a backup.
Squid 3 is enough fast for most cases. You will not see any
difference in
pe
* Marcus Kool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> I can confirm that. We switched from 2.6 -> 3.0 with no hassle (at 100
>>> requests/s)
>>>
>>
>> I had Adrian benchmark 3.x recently. With his specific RAM-pathways test.
>>
>> The cutoff for speed seems to be Squid3 reaching 500-650 req/sec and
>> Squid 2.
On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 13:18 +0900, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2008, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>
> > I had Adrian benchmark 3.x recently. With his specific RAM-pathways test.
> >
> > The cutoff for speed seems to be Squid3 reaching 500-650 req/sec and
> > Squid 2.6 going past that into the
On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 14:34 +1300, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> > * Christos Tsantilas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >>> But since, i had heard that Squid 2.6 version had better performance
> >>> than Squid 3.0, i would like to try that also as a backup.
> >> Squid 3 is enough fas
11 matches
Mail list logo
