On 23.11 09:49, Denis Vlasenko wrote: > On Wednesday 23 November 2005 01:40, John Cougar wrote: > > Info, > > > > Are you looking to slow squid down to a grinding halt?? ACLs are in memory > > for a very good reason, and forcing Squid to go to Disk I/O for every access > > would give you ... less than desirable results, rest assured. > > OSes started to cache file data in RAM many years ago: [deleted] > In other words: my Celeron 1200 MHz just did more than 100000 open/read/close's > per 1 sec. Yes, but it all costs CPU time. open, read, close, parsing ACL's. if ACL's would be read upon each request, squid would go noticeably slower. (it of course depends on number of ACL's in the file) The external acl type (or a redirector) might be a bit more efficient. However, someone can surely patch squid to allow volatile ACL files that would be checked for a change and reloaded after each one. Just fill up a wishlist report or pay someone to code it... -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@xxxxxxxxxxx ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Nothing is fool-proof to a talented fool.
