Is anyone out there running Squid with "aufs" type under heavy load with a single IDE drive? If so what kind of stabillity does it seem to have? How does performance compare under heavy load between "aufs" vs. "ufs" on a single IDE drive system?
I was told "aufs" was not as stable as "ufs" and should not be used in a production environment. Thanks. Matt > On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Matt wrote: > > >> The "aufs" cache_dir type automatically tries to do this when the harddrive > >> I/O load is too high. > > > > Is "aufs" type less stable then "ufs"? > > Not that I know of. > > Regards > Henrik
