2009/8/2 Heinz Diehl <htd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > 1. Change cache_dir in squid from ufs to aufs. That is almost always a good idea for any decent performance under any sort of concurrent load. I'd like proof otherwise - if one finds it, it indicates something which should be fixed. > 2. Format /dev/sdb1 with "mkfs.xfs -f -l lazy-count=1,version=2 -i attr=2 -d agcount=4" > 3. Mount it afterwards using "rw,noatime,logbsize=256k,logbufs=2,nobarrier" in fstab. > 4. Use cfq as the standard scheduler with the linux kernel Just out of curiousity, why these settings? Do you have any research which shows this? > (Btw: on my systems, squid-2.7 is noticeably _a lot_ slower than squid-3, > if the object is not in cache...) This is an interesting statement. I can't think of any specific reason why there should be any particular reason squid-2.7 performs worse than Squid-3 in this instance. This is the kind of "works by magic" stuff which deserves investigation so the issue(s) can be fully understood. Otherwise you may find that a regression creeps up in later Squid-3 versions because all of the issues weren't fully understood and documented, and some coder makes a change which they think won't have as much of an effect as it does. It has certainly happened before in squid. :) So, "more information please." Adrian
