On 6/16/05, Chris Reining <creining@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I would redeploy the existing proxy hardware but with Squid. I'm not
> sure what's sufficient, the FAQ and related pages on hardware are
> dated. The specs on these two machines are:
>
> HP Proliant DL380 G3
> 2.8 GHz Xeon CPU
> 2.5 GB PC2100 DDR RAM
> 6 36.4 GB 15K Ultra320 SCSI drives
>
> Good enough?
Actually, probably overkill for your needs.
> I read in the FAQ that RAID 5 should not be used. What's the
> suggestion on RAID 1 or using these 6 drives?
I would go with RAID-1 for the boot drive, then use configure
each individual drive as a standalone cache_dir, not RAID.
> Currently I have 164 GB available for cache with around 1.9 million
> objects cached on each server with around a 65% hit rate.
Wow, that's a great hit rate. Are the two servers using ICP or something
similar to share cached objects with each other?
> The OS would be Redhat Enterprise Server. Shouldn't be an issue and I
> don't think I could get away with running fbsd.
Despite my constant goading, Smarfilter on supports Solaris and Linux.
> Also, for web content filtering I am currently using N2H2 and from
> talking with Secure Computing I should move to Smartfilter DA for
> linux. Although the Squid compatability chart on Secure Computings
> website doesn't list DA, only Squid support up to Smartfilter 4.0.1.
The DA release notes reference Squid2.4-Stable6, but since DA uses
a redirect_program (instead of patching the Squid binary like the other
"Smartfilter" versions), DA should be usable with any version of Squid.
> Nevertheless, are there any performance issues with respect to doing
> on-box filtering? Any experience with Smartfilter {4.x, DA} + Squid?
I did not experience any significant performance issues when I last
trialed Smartfilter 4.0 on Solaris 8; throughput and response time
was the same before and after patching Squid for Smartfilter.
Kevin Kadow
