fooler wrote:
im not contesting with your better/efficient replacement policy... what im
pointing out here is that how do you guarantee not to have a disk full as
what the original poster wanted to do... cache_replacement_policy parameter
is not the proper solution here nor the cache_swap_low and cache_swap_high
parameters... but instead adjust the value of cache_dir parameter way below
from the total actual size of that partition...
hmm... i was pointing out a way of keeping the cache within the limits set in cache_dir, so one can take full use of a partition/HD
so say i have a 10GB partition/HD dedicated for a cache_dir, i should only set a cache_dir size "way below from the total actual size of that partition" like set it at say 4GB? then wouldn't that be a waste of space? setting the cache_dir to something small doesnt solve the problem, it would only reach 100% faster, then youd get warnings in squid's log
a small cache_dir with lots of requests coming in also makes for an ineffective cache.
if that the case then you got a buggy squid server... we have squid servers
running above 100 request per second, configured cache_dir half of the
total capacity (or below of that due to the cache size per ram ratio),
running under freebsd os and looks perfectly fine as what we wanted to do...
we also have requests above 100/s :)
we were running the latest stable release at that time and when i set cache_replacement_policy to something other than the default the cache size stayed within its limits.
fooler.
_ Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fully Searchable Archives With Friendly Web Interface at http://marc.free.net.ph
To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
