-----Original Message-----
From: RW
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 11:24 PM
To: squid-users@squid-cache.org
Subject: [squid-users] Re: Squid did not use the next set cache
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 10:54:09 +0100
David Touzeau wrote:
Dear,
I have set 2 caches on my squid 3.2.5
#--------- Multiple cpus -- (disabled)
workers 1
cache_dir aufs /var/squid/cache1 1105 16 256 max-size=716800
cache_dir ufs /var/cache/squid 2000 16 256
in caches infos we ca see that the first cache is full at 94% and
second cache is 0%
Why squid did not use the second cache in order to store objects ?
Is there any particular reason that one of the caches is aufs and one
ufs?
I don't know for sure but it wouldn't surprise me if mixing the two
doesn't work well with the default selection algorithm which is
least-load. The on disk format of aufs and ufs is the same so it's easy
to test.
Thanks
It seems that make caches on the same type works better...
