Squid will probably crash. RAID1 is an acceptable comprimise and may improve IO throughput slightly. I've got a goal to get some alternate storage code going in the next 6 to 12 months which will make a future codebase handle this sort of situation better. Adrian On Mon, Jan 28, 2008, Chris Woodfield wrote: > Hi, > > Reading the squid FAQ, it's obvious to me that putting cache_dirs on a > RAID (particularly RAID5) has serious performance penalties and is > highly discouraged. However, what's not as clear is how squid deals > with single-disk failures and whether or not it handles failures > gracefully enough to obviate the need for RAID. > > If I have a squid running multiple cache_dirs on single disks, and one > disk suffers a failure, how does squid respond? Will it simply stop > using that cache_dir and soldier on, or can this cause an application > crash? > > Also, when starting up squid, what is the effect of an unavailable > cache_dir? I'm thinking of a situation where squid is restarted before > a bad disk can be replaced. > > If squid does have problems here, could using pairs of RAID1 > partitions be an acceptable compromise, with the cost of reduced total > storage? > > Thanks, > > -Chris > -- - Xenion - http://www.xenion.com.au/ - VPS Hosting - Commercial Squid Support - - $25/pm entry-level VPSes w/ capped bandwidth charges available in WA -
