On 9/18/19 4:24 PM, B. Cook wrote: > Would you suggest I go back to -N? I cannot make a specific recommendation due to insufficient information. In general, --foreground is meant for startup scripts, while -N is meant for triage and development. For example, scripts using --foreground would not need to be rewritten when the admin enables SMP features (or if they become enabled by default). However, if, in your environment, squid-N performs much better, then recommending that you switch to --foreground would be silly! If you gather sufficient proof of poor performance, you should file a bug report instead (and/or sponsor the fix). > Squid Cache: Version 5.0.0-20190909-ra70e75b76 > root:/dev/shm # ls -al > 393232 2019-09-18 15:15 squid-cache_mem_ex.shm > 3145840 2019-09-18 16:16 squid-cache_mem_map_anchors.shm > 131080 2019-09-18 15:15 squid-cache_mem_map_filenos.shm > 262156 2019-09-18 15:15 squid-cache_mem_map_slices.shm > 131112 2019-09-18 15:15 squid-cache_mem_space.shm > 8 2019-09-18 15:15 squid-cf__metadata.shm > 32852 2019-09-18 15:15 squid-cf__queues.shm > 52 2019-09-18 15:15 squid-cf__readers.shm > 1073872936 2019-09-18 15:15 squid-squid-page-pool.shm > 1572976 2019-09-18 15:25 squid-transients_map_anchors.shm > 65544 2019-09-18 15:15 squid-transients_map_filenos.shm > 131084 2019-09-18 15:15 squid-transients_map_slices.shm > is this 'buggy' as well? * If the above segments were created by a single-worker Squid without any special squid.conf directives (i.e., Squid configured as you have shown earlier), then, yes, it is very buggy. * If the above segments were created by Squid configured with multiple workers and started with -N, then, yes, it is very buggy. * If the above segments were created by Squid configured with multiple workers and started without -N, then creation of all those shared memory segments is expected and does not indicate a bug. I suspect that is what you have tested. HTH, Alex. > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 4:14 PM Alex Rousskov wrote: >> >> On 9/18/19 3:37 PM, B. Cook wrote: >> >>> this is /dev/shm with --foreground (no workers) >> >>> -rw------- 1 proxy proxy 8 2019-09-18 10:30 squid-cf__metadata.shm >>> -rw------- 1 proxy proxy 8216 2019-09-18 10:30 squid-cf__queues.shm >>> -rw------- 1 proxy proxy 36 2019-09-18 10:30 squid-cf__readers.shm >> >> Your Squid is buggy: These collapsed forwarding shared memory segments >> should not be created for non-SMP configurations. Using these collapsed >> forwarding segments might slow down a non-SMP Squid instance, but I do >> not know whether they are actually _used_. I suspect they are not. >> >> The latest (future v5) Squid has the same bug AFAICT. >> >> Unfortunately, in my future-v5 tests, the same or similar bug exists in >> Squids started with -N, so this bug is probably not a good suspect in >> your investigation. I have no other suspects to offer at this time. >> >> Alex. >> >> >>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 2:38 PM Alex Rousskov wrote: >>> >>>> One thing you may want to check is whether your --foreground Squid is >>>> creating shared memory segments (look in /dev/shm/ or equivalent). >>>> Creating shared memory segments in non-SMP configurations is a bug. >>>> IIRC, we have fixed one or two of those bugs, but there may be more, and >>>> using shared memory tables can decrease performance of non-SMP >>>> configurations (there is no free lunch). >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
