The warning, i refering was coming in the cache.log of squid. epoll is enabled,and FD value is now set as 8192. Should it be fine for large sites like 200-300 users or i have to increase it more. I have chosen 8192 for the FD limit because it is the default value given in ebuild of squid. --- Gonzalo Arana <gonzalo.arana@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Jan 25, 2008 2:58 AM, bijayant kumar > <bijayant4u@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Arana, > > > > Thanks for your reply. As you are suggesting in > your > > reply that incresing the filedescriptor can be > > dangerous. Is there any other way to get rid of > this > > warning, because this warning makes browsing dead > > by "the warning" you mean the "Maximum > filedescriptors set to 131072" > message on ./configure output? That's not a > warning, just > an informative message. > > > slow,and the box is deployed at our client place. > I > > have to do things fast. If you have any other > > suggestion besides the increasing file descriptor > > please suggest me. > > Setting the FD limit to a ridiculous high value > (like 131072) > is a bit dangerous if you are using select or poll > (the default > connection polling schemes), because the kernel has > to > spend too many time checking each FD state on each > squid > main loop. > > If you are using epoll on Linux that danger > dissapears, as CPU > usage becomes rather independent on the number of > open FDs. > epoll is enabled by adding --enable-epoll in > ./configure args. > > So, setting max_fd to a really high value and using > epoll > makes squid much more scalable. > > HTH, > > -- > Gonzalo A. Arana > Bijayant Kumar Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
