On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:56:12 -0430, Jose Ildefonso Camargo Tolosa <ildefonso.camargo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Leonardo Carneiro > <chesterman86@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Jose Ildefonso Camargo Tolosa >> <ildefonso.camargo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 8:31 PM, Amos Jeffries <squid3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> wrote: >>>> Etienne Philip Pretorius wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hello List, >>>>> >>>>> I am running Squid Cache: Version 3.1.3. and I wanted to cache windows >>>>> updates and applied the suggested settings from >>>>> http://wiki.squid-cache.org/SquidFaq/WindowsUpdate but now I am >>>>> experiencing >>>>> another problem. >>>>> >>>>> It seems that while I am able to cache any partial downloaded files >>>>> with >>>>> squid now, I am flat-lining my break out onto the Internet. I just >>>>> wanted to >>>>> check here before attempting to implement delayed pools. As I see it, >>>>> it is >>>>> squid fetching the file at maximum speed possible. >>>>> >>>>> So my question is, if I implement delayed pools for the client >>>>> connections >>>>> - will squid also fetch the files at those reduced rates? >>>> >>>> Not directly. Squid will still fetch the files it has to at full speed. >>>> However, indirectly the clients will be delayed in their downloads so >>>> will >>>> spread their followup requests out over a longer time span than without >>>> delays. >>> >>> I remember and old thread about a similar situation: it was a person >>> who was trying to use squid for an ISP, but subscriber connections are >>> a lot slower than ISP's connection to the Internet, and so: when a >>> client started a download for a 600MB file, squid would fetch the >>> whole file using a lot of bandwidth, and the client would not even be >>> at 10% of the download, so.... if the client decided to cancel the >>> download at say, 25%, there would be a lot of wasted bandwidth. >>> >>> Can that situation be corrected with delay pools? or, what do you need >>> to correct that? The desired behavior is that squid actually follows >>> the download at the speed of the fastest client!, instead of its >>> connection to the Internet. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Sincerely, >>> >>> Ildefonso Camargo >>> >> >> I think this kind of bandwidth limitation you're aiming shoud be done >> with layer 3 and 4 tools, like queues etc. Otherwise, there will be >> wasted bandwidth, like you said. > > The problem is: how do you know, from the point of view of the queue > (say, tc with htb), that a certain connection comming from the squid > cache belongs to a particular client? (well, a wacky method comes to TOS. Assigned to each request on the same identical criteria as delay pools is assigned. > my mind: use one proxy IP per client IP, but that would be an admin > nightmare).... but, the thing is: I don't see what is the advantage of > the proxy fetching all the file at max speed, maybe, fetching up to 1 > or 2 MB ahead of the client (maybe and amount that makes sense > according to client's speed) could be useful, but "leaving the client > behind", I find it a little pointless. > >> >> But i also have a doubt. Will the delay pools be applied when the >> request is a cache or mem hit or only when the request is a miss? >> > > Now... that's a good question. Yes. Delay pools is on bytes written out to the client. Regardless of source. Amos
