On Friday 29 August 2008 03:40:21 Amos Jeffries wrote: > > > > For various reasons we have a number of multimedia files on this end of > > the > > connection, all large, and all with no explicit expiry information (which > > I > > can adjust if it helps). > > That will help. Enormously. The longer it can be explicitly known > cacheable the better (RRC states only up to a year though). Can I ask why? Is the default "LRU" or "heap LFUDA" policy concerned with expiry dates. > > However are there other likely "gotchas" with handling larger files? > > Some people find it more efficient to store them on disk rather than in > memory. If your squid is already 64-bit or handling it nicely then no > problem. I don't think there is a performance issue here with memory. I think it is just down to how the proxy decides which files to keep. As I said the goal is to offload bandwidth usage. I'm pondering dropping the caching of small objects, since mostly they cause a refresh_hit in this reverse proxy configuration, and the saving on bandwidth isn't huge (although presumably it saves a trip over a congested link). There is also a large number of small image files which I believe can have a long expiry date set in Apache, I just need to check that with the guy who did the file naming algorithmn. This would probably be a bigger win. Perhaps I just need a cache which is as larger than all the data to be served - which might be possible to organise given the current price of disk space.
