> Do you really need that large storage in a single Squid proxy? There is > very little return when growing the cache beyond 1 weeks worth of content.
i get now around 24% bytehitratio other compititors in my country is getting around 40% with 1TB cache using cacheflow > The upper limit depends on your OS and architecture i am using now FreeBSD 4.8. and planning also to use FreeBSD for the machine (either 4.9 or 5.2 when released) i think freebsd support upto 2GB for single process right? if so what is the recomended 32-bit OS btw can COSS be a future solution or not? Netguy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Henrik Nordstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Netguy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 12:06 PM Subject: Re: [squid-users] large storage > On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Netguy wrote: > > > i am planning to buy a machine with large storage (around 1 or 2 > > tera-byte) and running it as squid proxy. > > Do you really need that large storage in a single Squid proxy? There is > very little return when growing the cache beyond 1 weeks worth of content. > > > i have now a machine with 125GB cache with cache_mem set to 256 and the > > squid process grows up to 1.3GB. the problem is in my openion in the > > memory because the squid process will grow above 2GB and this will crash > > it. > > The upper limit depends on your OS and architecture: > > Some Intel OS:es allow for processes up to around 3GB in size. > > If you run on a 64-bit architecture then process size is virtually > unlimited. But on the other hand Squid is very limited tested in 64-bit > environments, and it is also a fact that the memory requirements increases > significantly when going to 64 bits as many of the cache index fields is > word size dependent, causing a memory requirements increase of at least > 50% more on 64-bit architectures compared to 32-bit architectures. > > Regards > Henrik >
