2008/7/30 Adrian Chadd <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > 2008/7/30 Marcos Dutra <macdutra@xxxxxxxxx>: >> 2008/7/30 Adrian Chadd <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >>> (gah, why oh why won't gmail do what I said with my damned From:? Oh well..) >> >> Sorry :( > > Hey, that isn't your fault. It just means I occasionally seem to > misfile emails. Anyway.. > >>> 2008/7/30 Marcos Dutra <macdutra@xxxxxxxxx>: >>> cacheboy is "just" Squid-2.HEAD with a whole lot of code shuffling. >>> Squid-2.HEAD should contain all of the 2.7 and 2.6 NTLM authentication >>> stuff. >> >> It's cool, I will test cacheboy. > > Well, I'm all for cacheboy testing (as its mostly Squid-2.HEAD testing > too!) but I'd be very surprised right now if there was a measurable > performance difference between Squid-2.6/Squid-2.7 and Cacheboy in > your environment. Why do you working in two projects? > >> Yeah, I running polygraph with NTLM for test performance, but I would >> like more performance on this server. > > What metrics are you using for "more performance" ? I used basicaly req/sec and conections in port 3128. The time of open page in the browser is very important too. > >>> The lookup speed may be related to authentication. Have you tried >>> disabling authentication for a specific desktop machine and try >>> browsing? > >> I don't it this yet, but the authentication I think is not a problem, >> I will try this. > > Well, its worth ruling out authentication as a contributing factor. > NTLM authentication using Samba isn't the fastest of things.. Why in my tests with polygraph, when "netstat -an |grep 3306| wc" up to more 5000 connections and my squid don't open page or if open is much slow? When netstat up to 7000 connections, squidclient mgr:info show me around 13000 req/minute maximum number. After minutes this values down in 1 hour the medium is 8000 req/minute. > >> One question, squid Vs cacheboy comparision which the better? > > At the present time? Mostly subjective. Cacheboy is "adrian's idea of > where Squid-2 should've gone and should be going" ; the best way to > compare Squid-(2, 3) and Cacheboy is to look at the developers, the > development, the roadmap, and see which suits you better. > > There's no real performance or functionality reason to move over to > Cacheboy but I won't say no to more users. I'd like the > positive/negative feedback :) > > > > Adrian > Ps. I used your workload in my tests but failed :(. Well see this after lunch here! Thanks Marcos
