Chris Woodfield wrote:
For our purposes (reverse proxy usage) we don't see any missing features
from squid 3 that we would need - however, we'd like to see the code
base mature some more before we trust it in production. Same reason that
smart folks don't deploy new Cisco IOS trains until it hits the 3rd or
4th rebuild.
However, I will use this opportunity to put forth my own wishlist of
missing features (that AFAIK aren't even present in squid 3.0 at this
time - if they are please let me know!:
- Multithreading, multithreading, multithreading!
Pick a large number... ;-)
- Better handling of cache_dir failures:
What I mean here is, if you have multiple cache_dirs configured
(presumably on separate disks) squid should not refuse to start if one
is unavailable. It should scream loudly, yes, but should be able to
carry on with the ones it can use. For bonus points, make squid capable
of "dropping" a cache_dir that becomes unavailable during runtime.
Thanks for the reminder. I had some wishlist myself here. I've added
this and mine to the official wishlist.
- Fix mem_cache bottleneck that effectively prohibits large files from
being stored in squid's memory.
http://www.mail-archive.com/squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg52509.html
Hmm, not sure exactly what Adrian as planned there, beyond changing the
underlying malloc/calloc system of squid to something else.
Added it to the 'undocumented features wishlist' anyway.
- Allow helper children (url_rewriters, etc) to send some sort of
"pause" message back to squid to signal that that child is temporarily
unavailable for new queries, and then a "ready" message when it's
available again.
(yes, this is kinda obscure - the issue here is a single-threaded
rewriter helper app that occasionally has to re-read its rules database,
and can't answer queries while it's doing so)
Um, sounds interesting. I've added it to the wishlist. Lets see if
anyone picks it up.
- A better mechanism (B-tree maybe?) for storing cache contents such
that cached object URIs can be quickly searched via path or regex for
reporting/purging purposes.
We'd have to find a tree that is faster than or as fast as a hash over a
very large dataset. Otherwise its not worth it to justify an overall
performance degradation for one or two relatively minor occurances.
- Oh, and I want a pony.
Well... if you are willing to sponsor the funding of it that can be
arranged easier than most of the other requests.
Amos
Thanks,
-C
On Mar 16, 2008, at 9:18 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Just to summarise the discussion, both public and private.
* Squid-3 is receiving the bulk of the active core Squid developers'
focus;
* Squid-2 won't be actively developed at the moment by anyone outside
of paid commercial work;
* I've been asked (and agreed at the moment) to not push any big
changes to
Squid-2.
If your organisation relies on Squid-2 and you haven't any plans to
migrate
to Squid-3, then there's a few options.
* Discuss migrating to Squid-3 with the Squid-3 developers, see what
can be done.
* Discuss commercial Squid-2 support/development with someone (eg
Xenion/me).
* Migrate away from Squid to something else.
Obviously all of us would prefer that users wouldn't migrate away from
Squid in
general, so if the migration to Squid-3 isn't on your TODO list for
whatever
reason then its in your best interests -right now- to discuss this out
in the
open.
If you don't think that Squid as a project is heading in a direction
that is useful
for you, then its in your best interests -right now- to discuss this
with the
Squid development team rather than ignoring the issue or discussing it
privately.
I'd prefer open discussions which everyone can view and contribute
towards.
If there's enough interest in continuing the development of Squid-2 along
my Roadmap or any other plan then I'm interested in discussing this
with you.
If the interest is enough to warrant beginning larger changes to
Squid-2 to
support features such as IPv6, threading and improved general performance
then I may reconsider my agreement with the Squid-3 developers (and
deal with
whatever pain that entails.)
At the end of the day, I'd rather see something that an increasing
number of people
on the Internet will use and - I won't lie here - whatever creates a
self sustaining
project, both from community and financial perspectives.
Adrian
--
Please use Squid 2.6STABLE17+ or 3.0STABLE1+
There are serious security advisories out on all earlier releases.
