Thanks, that was my hunch. I'll let you know how it goes when I have some performance metrics.
Skye On 1-Jul-08, at 11:24 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Skye Poier > Nott writes > : >> I want to deploy Varnish with very large cache sizes (200GB or more) >> for large, long lived file sets. Is it more efficient to use large >> swap or large mmap in this scenario? > > We have no real-world experience with content of that size, so > the answer is: we don't know. > > Off the bat, I would think files would be better, for exactly the > reson you cite: the swap management is pretty thirsty after metadata. > > -- > Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 > FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe > Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by > incompetence. > _______________________________________________ > varnish-misc mailing list > varnish-misc@projects.linpro.no > http://projects.linpro.no/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc _______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list varnish-misc@projects.linpro.no http://projects.linpro.no/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
