yes but for us, latency is also an important factor. increasing max object size means more cache storage space is being consumed by bigger objects, which might get hits less too often. we have object hit ratio at around 50% and our byte hit with current setting is around 33%. with larger objects in cache, byte hit could probably be raised to above 40%, can't it? but the request hit drops too i suppose. its a tradeoff. On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > I think 5.7mbits/sec traffic with 18req/sec per cache (about 54req/sec for > > 3 cache) makes around 108kbit/request. still is quite big though. we allow > > objects upto 8MBytes to be cached. > > strange that you eliminate hits that saves the most traffic by limiting > object sizes. > > i use 10GB max size. > > > > > On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Nov 27, 2006, Manoj Rajkarnikar wrote: > >>> request per second per cache is around 18 at peak time. traffic flow > >>> combined to all three cache is around 5.7Mbits at peak. do you think this > >>> cpu usage is normal for the provided load ?? > >> > >> Not for 18 per second; but 5.7 mbit/peak at 18req/sec is averaging ~ 300k per > >> reply. Thats quite big. :) > >> > >> Did you compile with epoll() for linux or kqueue() for FreeBSD? Or, hm, can > >> you just paste ./squid -v here? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> > >> Adrian > >> > > > > -- > > Manoj Rajkarnikar > > > > System Administrator > > Vianet Communications Pvt Ltd > > Pulchowk, Lalitpur, Nepal. > > (PH)977-1-5546410 > > > > > -- Manoj Rajkarnikar System Administrator Vianet Communications Pvt Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur, Nepal. (PH)977-1-5546410
