On 03/16/2017 10:42 PM, senor wrote: > I understand that AUFS is not SMP aware but if each worker has its own > AUFS cache is there any problem other than the inefficiencies of > duplicate cache? Yes. Clients may get stale cached entries, possibly breaking advanced HTTP transactions that rely on a more-or-less compliant proxy cache. Also, I do not know exactly how local and shared cache indexes interact when SMP-unaware store updates its local index without updating the shared one. Most likely, such partial updates lead to bugs. You may reduce bugs probability by not mixing shared and ufs-based stores in SMP mode, but I doubt you can eliminate all problems that way. > I'm pretty sure that AUFS is used with squid running in SMP mode a lot. I can think of many examples where a lot of people do things they should not be doing and do not do things they should be doing. Just because many use X to solve some problem, does not make using X a good idea and certainly does not make it the best solution available. > The squid wiki even has a CARP configuration example for this combination. I hope there are no official examples advertising SMP AUFS configurations. If there are, they should be removed IMO. Alex. _______________________________________________ squid-users mailing list squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
