On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 12:58:08 +1200 (NZST), "Amos Jeffries" <squid3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: [cut] > > You have 5 physical disks by the looks of it. Best usage of those is to > split the cache_dir one per disk (sharing a disk leads to seek clashes). OK, I will disable LVM and try it. > I'm not to up on the L1/L2 efficiencies, but "64 256" or higher L1 seems > to be better for larger dir sizes. OK... > For a quad or higher CPU machine, you may do well to have multiple Squid > running (one per 2 CPUs or so). One squid doing the caching on the 300GB > drives and one on the smaller ~100 GB drives (to get around a small bug > where mismatched AUFS dirs cause starvation in small dir), peered together > with no-proxy option to share info without duplicating cache. 4 Squid's, 1 disk per/Squid proc. and a cache-peer config... Sounds good. [cut] > Absolutely minimal swapping of memory. Decreased to 2GiB, the rule in faq/wiki about x% cache_dir (disk) should be y% cache_mem seems confused to me. -- Herbert
