> Recently on this list someone suggested using more than one squid process on
> the same server to make better use of SMP hardware and the huge amount of
> ram a 32 bit squid cannot directly address. I don't remember the thread
> title right now, but maybe some additional foot for thought can be f
Gavin McCullagh ha scritto:
Hi,
I don't mean to labour this, I'm just keen to understand better and
obviously you guys are the experts on squid.
While I'm definitely not an expert on squid, I like this thread, so I'll
put another 2 (euro)cents on the table...
On Mon, 16 Mar 2009, Marcello
Hi,
I don't mean to labour this, I'm just keen to understand better and
obviously you guys are the experts on squid.
On Mon, 16 Mar 2009, Marcello Romani wrote:
>> Really? I would have thought the linux kernel's disk caching would be far
>> less optimised for this than using a large squid cache
Gavin McCullagh ha scritto:
Hi,
On Mon, 16 Mar 2009, Marcello Romani wrote:
From my little experience I would suggest that you give squid cache_mem
a value of just some hundreds of MBs, and let the other GBs of ram to
squid for indexes and the OS for disk caching. I guess after some time
Hi,
On Mon, 16 Mar 2009, Marcello Romani wrote:
> From my little experience I would suggest that you give squid cache_mem
> a value of just some hundreds of MBs, and let the other GBs of ram to
> squid for indexes and the OS for disk caching. I guess after some time
> this will take you nea
Gavin McCullagh ha scritto:
Hi,
we're running a reasonably busy squid proxy system here which peaks at
about 130-150 requests per second.
The OS is Ubuntu Hardy and at the minute, I'm using the packaged 2.6.18
squid version. I'm considering a hand-compile of 2.7, though it's quite
nice to g
Gavin McCullagh ha scritto:
Hi,
we're running a reasonably busy squid proxy system here which peaks at
about 130-150 requests per second.
The OS is Ubuntu Hardy and at the minute, I'm using the packaged 2.6.18
squid version. I'm considering a hand-compile of 2.7, though it's quite
nice to g
Hi,
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>> The server hardware isn't 64-bit so surely I can't run a 64-bit squid
>> build, can I?
>
> Ah, no I believe thats a problem. I kind of assumed that since your
> system could take >2GB of RAM it was 64-bit enabled hardware.
Ah well.
>> It may he
Gavin McCullagh wrote:
Hi,
thanks for the reply.
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009, Amos Jeffries wrote:
FYI: The latest Intrepid or Jaunty package should work just as well in
Hardy.
I'll look into this. I tried to build the intrepid debian package from
source, but I came across a build dependency whic
Hello,
althouh Amos explained much, I think there may be something to add...
> Gavin McCullagh wrote:
> >We've been monitoring the hit rates, cpu usage, etc. using munin. We
> >average about 13% byte hit rate. Iowait is now a big issue -- perhaps not
> >surprisingly. I had 4GB RAM in the serv
Hi,
thanks for the reply.
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> FYI: The latest Intrepid or Jaunty package should work just as well in
> Hardy.
I'll look into this. I tried to build the intrepid debian package from
source, but I came across a build dependency which was apparently not
a
Gavin McCullagh wrote:
Hi,
we're running a reasonably busy squid proxy system here which peaks at
about 130-150 requests per second.
The OS is Ubuntu Hardy and at the minute, I'm using the packaged 2.6.18
squid version. I'm considering a hand-compile of 2.7, though it's quite
nice to get se
Hi,
we're running a reasonably busy squid proxy system here which peaks at
about 130-150 requests per second.
The OS is Ubuntu Hardy and at the minute, I'm using the packaged 2.6.18
squid version. I'm considering a hand-compile of 2.7, though it's quite
nice to get security patches from the di
13 matches
Mail list logo
