Dear Waitman, Testing the SSD drive, before installing it on the squid, showed huge performance advantage in IOPS, read/write. So, I thought that this will solve the problems I had with HDD. But it was not so, look at this output: 12:39:35 PM CPU %user %nice %sys %iowait %irq %soft %steal %idle intr/s 12:39:37 PM all 2.87 0.00 2.25 44.44 0.12 3.50 0.00 46.82 11666.50 12:39:37 PM 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 4.50 0.00 95.00 4764.00 12:39:37 PM 1 0.00 0.00 0.50 4.98 0.00 2.49 0.00 92.04 2097.50 12:39:37 PM 2 11.56 0.00 8.54 76.88 0.00 3.02 0.00 0.00 1977.50 12:39:37 PM 3 0.50 0.00 0.00 95.52 0.50 3.48 0.00 0.00 2827.50 This is a moment before the system went down, the IO is up high. Waitman Gobble-2 wrote: > > > smaugadi wrote: >> Dear ALL, >> We have a squid server with high volume of traffic, 200 – 300 MB. >> The server is in transparent mode and using 18GB of ramdisk. With this >> configuration performance is very good (after optimizing the squid and >> the linux machine). >> The problem is the small size of cache directory. >> Since IO is a big issue with squid we purchased the intel ssd x25-m 160gb > > hmmmm, i have not yet experimented with an ssd, but i've read that it's > advised to disable swap because heavy reads/writes kill the thing. the > information was in regards to using an ssd on a netbook running linux - > (for example running windows on the netbook with an ssd is certain > death, unavoidable doom - as you probably know windows machines read and > write to the disk like there's no tomorrow, and for no real good reason > - they swap just for the heck of it, even just turning the thing on it > starts swapping) > > so... it would make sense to me that you're going to experience troubles > running a high traffic cache on an ssd. > > Waitman > > > > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Squid-high-bandwidth-IO-issue-%28ramdisk-SSD%29-tp24775448p24776249.html Sent from the Squid - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
