Interesting, so on ext4 (which is what I am using) there's no performance differences between using different numbers? "Convert your dreams to achievable and realistic goals, this way the journey is satisfying and progressive." - LP Best regards, The Geek Guy Lawrence Pingree http://www.lawrencepingree.com/resume/ Author of "The Manager's Guide to Becoming Great" http://www.Management-Book.com -----Original Message----- From: Amos Jeffries [mailto:squid3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Tuesday, August 5, 2014 6:28 PM To: squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Quick question > -----Original Message----- > From: Lawrence Pingree > > I have a 175 gigabyte cache file system. What would be the optimal L1 and L2 > cache dirs allocated for this cache size to perform well? > On 6/08/2014 11:52 a.m., Lawrence Pingree wrote: > Anyone? That depends on the OS filesystem underlying the cache, and the size of objects in it. The L1/L2 settings matter on FS which have a per-directory limit on inode entries, or need to scan the full list on each file open/stat event (I think that was FAT32, NTFS, maybe ext2, maybe old unix FS). On FS which do not do those two things they are just an admin convenience. Amos
<<attachment: smime.p7s>>
