Hello Dan:
i used squid 2.7stable9 ago ,and i worried whether
squid 3.5.2 is stablest for us until now too .
and you ?
Do you think Whether version is stablest at squid
3.xxx ?
Well I got 3.5.2 into production for a few hours and Bad Things happened:
*1) A hefty performance hit*
Load average was maybe a tad higher but CPU. memory and I/O were about
the same. However the system seemed to top out at around 40 requests
per second (on a client that usually hits 100—150 rps) and squid
became very slow to respond to squidclient requests:
[root@proxy-LS5 ~]# time squidclient -p 8080 mgr:utilization | grep
client_http.requests
client_http.requests = 40.965955/sec
client_http.requests = 41.168528/sec
client_http.requests = 42.111847/sec
client_http.requests = 166646
real0m7.163s
user0m0.002s
sys0m0.006s
*2) Lots of Segment Violations*
These obviously suck. Backtrace attached.
Just cannot win. Is it possible these two issues are due to the patch
for #4206?
On 16 Mar 2015, at 6:18 pm, Amos Jeffries <squid3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:squid3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
On 16/03/2015 7:16 p.m., Dan Charlesworth wrote:
Hey again Amos -
Unfortunately the patch for #4206 won’t apply to squid-3.4.12. I was
going to try creating a new one but couldn’t find an equivalent line
in client_side.cc for that version.
I guess the #4206 issue doesn’t apply to v3.4.x after all?
Correct. Oh well.
[Not a C programmer]
Thanks for your time today.
P.S. I'd love to upgrade to v3.5 but I'm waiting for somebody
smarter than me to take the lead on a CentOS 6 RPM SPEC file.
Eliezer to the rescue ;-)
http://wiki.squid-cache.org/KnowledgeBase/CentOS#Squid-3.5
Amos
_______________________________________________
squid-users mailing list
squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
_______________________________________________
squid-users mailing list
squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
