Search squid archive

Re: coss vs aufs vs diskd

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Monah,

Monah Baki wrote:
Hi all,

I am trying to deploy a cache server in a environment for kids (approx 2000). Currently my cache (squid-2.6-stable17) is configured to use diskd, but since it's in a test environment I did not reach the limit where I read under high load it will crash. Coss since it's experimental, yet some users have given it good remarks as far as performance and stability.
So should I stick with diskd or switch to coss?

What is your hardware setup? I am guessing it will be a P4 machine with 1 or 2 GB of memory with a couple of hard drives.

From my experience, if your server is running FreeBSD and the average requests are under 50 req/sec, then DISKD is the best choice. However if your req/sec should go above 50-60, then I would suggest AUFS.

If your squid proxy will be running on a Linux box, then I would suggest AUFS.

COSS is working great for me on my FreeBSD squid boxes. It seems specially good for caching small objects. The only drawback of COSS is it's long rebuilding process.

The best option would be to use two (2) storage schemes.

(1.) DISKD + COSS for FreeBSD
(2.) AUFS + COSS  for Linux

Note: This are just my suggestions!

Hope that helps.


Thanking you...



Thanks


BSD Networking, Microsoft Notworking








--

With best regards and good wishes,

Yours sincerely,

Tek Bahadur Limbu

System Administrator

(TAG/TDG Group)
Jwl Systems Department

Worldlink Communications Pvt. Ltd.

Jawalakhel, Nepal

http://www.wlink.com.np

http://teklimbu.wordpress.com

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Samba]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Linux USB]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux