Another one here not using SMP, and using aufs. I stopped seen this issue frequently when I reduced my cache size, from 70 GB to 30 GB now. Regards On 3/19/15, Dan Charlesworth <dan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hey Eliezer > > I don't actually use SMP. I could be wrong about the aufs thing; I haven't > personally tested—and don't currently plan to test—any other cache types. I > just gleaned that from the comments in the bug reports. > > Kind regards > Dan > > > On 20 March 2015 at 13:45, Eliezer Croitoru <eliezer@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Hey Dan and John, >> >> If indeed this bug is only for UFS\AUFS cache_dir then I would try to >> make >> sure that large-rock will not sustain the same issue. >> >> I have not seen in any of the bug reports anything that would reproduce >> the issue. >> To make sure the issue is understood and can or cannot be reproduced >> using >> ufs\aufs will give one direction. >> I would try to test large rock in my next testing round with SMP but if >> anyone has some option to test it first I will be glad if it will be done >> to make sure ufs\aufs is the culprit. >> >> Also if indeed it's with aufs\ufs only with SMP then it means that the >> issue is related to the way SMP can make a ufs\aufs cache_dir dirty and >> there for the answer would be pretty simple to the issue in hands. >> >> Eliezer >> >> On 20/03/2015 00:32, Dan Charlesworth wrote: >> >>> Hi John >>> >>> This bug has been affecting me on an off for a while as well. I believe >>> it >>> only affects aufs and, unfortunately, has been around for years. >>> >>> See:http://bugs.squid-cache.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3279 >>> And see:http://bugs.squid-cache.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3483 >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
