I am not sure I understand this. The "cache" is supposed to run on raw disk (preferred) or on a preallocated file, so "disk usage" should be fixed.
john On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:08 AM, Adam Jefferiss <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry about the late reply, the logging disk usage seems to be running on > average higher. Although the cache disk usage does peak the highest. > > > On 24 June 2011 17:48, Billy Vierra <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Adam, >> Which disk usage is higher? Cache disk or logging disk? >> >> >> On 06/24/2011 02:06 AM, Adam Jefferiss wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I've been using web-polygraph[1] to run some performance tests through >>> traffic server 3.0 and have noticed that compared to 2.0.1 the disk usage is >>> considerably higher on average, for example one run has 2.0.1 marked down at >>> 18% disk usage on average while 3.0 is up to 50%. >>> >>> I've got logging set to errors only to test to see if the transaction >>> logging was causing the problem, but without much difference between the >>> two. I've also effectively disabled the cache in storage.conf by setting the >>> cache size to 0, again without too much of a difference. >>> >>> Is there anything obvious that I've missed? >>> >>> We're looking at having traffic server replace our current proxy, but the >>> disk usage results are causing a few concerns. >>> >>> Any information you guys you can point me towards would be great. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Adam >>> >>> [1] http://www.web-polygraph.org >>> >> >
