Hi All, I face a weird issue regarding DISKS cache-dir model and I would like to have your expertise here Here is the result of a cache object with an AUFS cache_dir: 1436916227.603 462 192.168.1.88 00:0c:29:6e:2c:99 TCP_HIT/200 10486356 GET http://proof.ovh.net/files/10Mio.dat - HIER_NONE/- application/octet-stream 0x30 Now, here is the same object from the same Squid box but using the DISKD cache_dir: 1436916293.648 24281 192.168.1.88 00:0c:29:6e:2c:99 TCP_HIT/200 10486356 GET http://proof.ovh.net/files/10Mio.dat - HIER_NONE/- application/octet-stream 0x30 Do you see something weird ? This is the same Squid (3.5.5), I just changed from AUFS to DISKD and restarted the Squid... Same object from the cache but *0.462 sec* in AUFS and *24.281 sec* in DISKD. 52 times more fast in AUFS, why ? Any idea to speed the diskd up or at least reduce it ? I could understand the response times could not be the same, but here this is the Grand Canyon ! My cache_dir option used in test: cache_dir diskd /var/spool/squid3w1 190780 16 256 min-size=0 max-size=293038080 Thanks in advance for your input... Bye Fred -- View this message in context: http://squid-web-proxy-cache.1019090.n4.nabble.com/AUFS-vs-DISKS-tp4672209.html Sent from the Squid - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ squid-users mailing list squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
