On Tue, Oct 16, 2007, Paul Cocker wrote: > For the ignorant among us can you clarify the meaning of "devices"? Bluecoat. Higher end Cisco ACE appliances/blades. In the accelerator space, stuff like what became the Juniper DX can SLB and cache about double what squid can in memory. Just so you know, the Cisco Cache Engine stuff from about 8 years ago still beats Squid for the most part. I remember seeing numbers of ~ 2400 req/sec, to/from disk where appropriate, versus Squid's current maximum throughput of about 1000. And this was done on Cisco's -then- hardware - I think that test was what, dual PIII 800's or something? They were certainly pulling about 4x the squid throughput for the same CPU in earlier polygraphs. I keep saying - all this stuff is documented and well-understood. How to make fast network applications - well understood. How to have network apps scale well under multiple CPUs - well understood, even better by the Windows people. Cache filesystems - definitely well understood. Time spent by people to implement this stuff on Squid - almost none. (Current hardware can and will saturate gigabit ethernet with HTTP traffic on two modern CPU cores. Maybe one CPU core for low transaction rates. Stuff is pretty fantastically quick.) Who wants Squid to do that? Adrian -- - Xenion - http://www.xenion.com.au/ - VPS Hosting - Commercial Squid Support - - $25/pm entry-level bandwidth-capped VPSes available in WA -
