Interesting, so on ext4 (which is what I am using) there's no performance differences between using different numbers?
"Convert your dreams to achievable and realistic goals, this way the journey is satisfying and progressive." - LP Best regards, The Geek Guy Lawrence Pingree http://www.lawrencepingree.com/resume/ Author of "The Manager's Guide to Becoming Great" http://www.Management-Book.com -----Original Message----- From: Amos Jeffries [mailto:squ...@treenet.co.nz] Sent: Tuesday, August 5, 2014 6:28 PM To: squid-users@squid-cache.org Subject: Re: [squid-users] Quick question > -----Original Message----- > From: Lawrence Pingree > > I have a 175 gigabyte cache file system. What would be the optimal L1 and L2 > cache dirs allocated for this cache size to perform well? > On 6/08/2014 11:52 a.m., Lawrence Pingree wrote: > Anyone? That depends on the OS filesystem underlying the cache, and the size of objects in it. The L1/L2 settings matter on FS which have a per-directory limit on inode entries, or need to scan the full list on each file open/stat event (I think that was FAT32, NTFS, maybe ext2, maybe old unix FS). On FS which do not do those two things they are just an admin convenience. Amos
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature