Isaac Witmer wrote:
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Marcus Kool
<marcus.kool@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
yes.
1) the index is in memory and needs 10-20 MB index in memory for each GB on disk
I was under the impression (from the oriely squid manual) that recent
versions do not use up extra RAM with bigger caches.
But maybe I read it wrong?
Also, I'm a bit confused as there's only one apparent "memory" option
in the squid configuration.
Could you explain/point me to a tutorial?
http://wiki.squid-cache.org/SquidFaq/SquidMemory
2) the housekeeping of the index costs more CPU cycles for a larger cache
3) the housekeeping of the cached objects on disk costs time and grows when the cache is larger. Can be minimised by having cache_swap_low 92 and cache_swap_high 93.
The system has 2 GB memory, assuming that the system is dedicated for Squid
you need 400 MB for the OS, leaving 1.6 GB for Squid.
A safe value for cache_mem would be 500 MB
There are many tuning parameters.
The best one is to have more disks.
Marcus
Marcello Romani wrote:
Ralf Hildebrandt ha scritto:
* Ralf Hildebrandt <Ralf.Hildebrandt@xxxxxxxxxx>:
maximum_object_size 50 MB
cache_dir diskd /squid-cache 45000 16 16
request_header_max_size 15 KB
request_body_max_size 750 MB
The machine is 32 bits, MemTotal: 2060960 kB
Some stats from before "the purge":
1.4Mio cached objects
42GB Cache size
Could it be that cache_mem + memory required to manage 42GB of cache caused the squid process to be swapped ?
