The squid developers recommend aufs:
http://www.squid-cache.org/mail-archive/squid-users/200709/0150.html
Most people seem to regard it as stable.
at most 1 hour before crash on my system with 300 users served, many
version tested, none worked.
possibly it doesn't under linux or under
On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 08:26:16 -0700
Kurt Buff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, I'll look up the diskd docs for
squid, and see what that's all about.
I'm not sure that diskd is still preferred for FreeBSD. The three
cache types: ufs,aufs and diskd are all the same on disk. diskd is ufs
with
I'm not sure that diskd is still preferred for FreeBSD. The three
cache types: ufs,aufs and diskd are all the same on disk. diskd is ufs
with extra processes to handle disk access, aufs uses threads instead.
i don't know what is preferred. i know what works.
only ufs and diskd is reliable,
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 17:15:58 +0200 (CEST)
Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure that diskd is still preferred for FreeBSD.
i don't know what is preferred. i know what works.
only ufs and diskd is reliable,
The squid developers recommend aufs:
be using as a squid box.
I've configured two drives as RAID 1 with the third as a hot spare,
and two drives as RAID0 - I intend to put the squid cache on the
latter, and have mounted it as /squid.
it would be better to turn off RAID at all and use all five disks as
fine squid partitions.
Ryan Coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't see the need. And I couldn't get 7 to install on my
brand new machine. Once I got the 6.3 amd64 build it went in
without an issue.
Just because you could not install 7.0 does not mean 7.0
is flawed.
I don't see the reason to run the latest
less capable whitebox. One of the big issues I've had has manifested
itself recently - we've moved from a T1 to a DS3, and while overall
throughput has increased dramatically, people are now complaining that
the Internet is slow, which I've found is all down to initial page
load. I'm pursuing
Sorry. This should also have been sent to the list.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Kurt Buff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 8:22 AM
Subject: Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
To: Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 4:51 AM, Wojciech
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Wojciech Puchar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
be using as a squid box.
I've configured two drives as RAID 1 with the third as a hot spare,
and two drives as RAID0 - I intend to put the squid cache on the
latter, and have mounted it as /squid.
it would be better to
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 5:11 PM, Kurt Buff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All,
I've got a Compaq ML570 with 2gb RAM, dual PIII Xeon 700s and 5x10k
RPM drives in it attached to a Compaq 5300 RAID card that I'm going to
be using as a squid box.
I've configured two drives as RAID 1 with the third as
Matthew Seaman wrote:
should we use 7 or think about going with 6.3?
I'd go with 7.x every time. It wipes the floor with 6.3 performance-wise
and it is just as stable and bug-free as you'ld expect from FreeBSD.
You've
seen it works for you: there's no conceivable reason to downgrade.
I
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 10:13 AM, Steve Bertrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matthew Seaman wrote:
should we use 7 or think about going with 6.3?
I'd go with 7.x every time. It wipes the floor with 6.3 performance-wise
and it is just as stable and bug-free as you'ld expect from FreeBSD.
I'm hoping that 137gb striped across two RAID0 volumes should be
sufficient space for our needs, and also hoping that it will be faster
than individual drives.
there is NO point to assume it will be faster than sum of speed of each
drive, with program that already have logic to spread load
As a benchmark, there are about 230 people in my site who will be
it's strange. my squid supports 300 users, with just 3 partitions on 3
drives (and other part of drives used for other things). and it EASILY do
this.
To further extend the question - what about things like mounting the
RAID0
Steve
It's been suggested off-list that I put up a caching DNS server. I'm
in the process of doing that. Initial page load delay, however, is a
new phenomenon, cropping up after our move from the T1 to the DS3, so
I was putting it down to increased use of cache - I'm certainly
willing to be
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Wojciech Puchar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steve
It's been suggested off-list that I put up a caching DNS server. I'm
in the process of doing that. Initial page load delay, however, is a
new phenomenon, cropping up after our move from the T1 to the DS3, so
I
it's strange at least you haven't it already for a long time. no matter you
use squid or not. it takes 5 minutes to set up, and saves a bit of bandwidth
and a lot of time on resolving hostnames
I just looked at my configuration - looks like I had it going at one
point, but disabled it, and I
All,
I've got a Compaq ML570 with 2gb RAM, dual PIII Xeon 700s and 5x10k
RPM drives in it attached to a Compaq 5300 RAID card that I'm going to
be using as a squid box.
I've configured two drives as RAID 1 with the third as a hot spare,
and two drives as RAID0 - I intend to put the squid cache
Kurt Buff wrote:
All,
I've got a Compaq ML570 with 2gb RAM, dual PIII Xeon 700s and 5x10k
RPM drives in it attached to a Compaq 5300 RAID card that I'm going to
be using as a squid box.
I've configured two drives as RAID 1 with the third as a hot spare,
and two drives as RAID0 - I intend to
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 20:39:05 -0500
Ryan Coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would recommend fBSD 6.3 instead of 7. You don't need it, unless
you have a documented reason it has to be 7.0
really?!
i thought 7 was supposed to be a big improvement over 6.3:
Dramatic improvements in performance
There are improvements in the wireless system and in locking. One of
the most interesting is the possibility of using zfs and dtrace from
Solaris. Many of these features have undiscovered bugs that you might
prefer not discovering on your own server. For desktop and laptop use
I would certainly
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 23:17:05 -0400
David Gurvich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Many of these features have undiscovered bugs that you might
prefer not discovering on your own server.
oh oh.
but what if we are just running a plain webserver (mainly static html)
and email. we are sticking to ufs of
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 6:39 PM, Ryan Coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kurt Buff wrote:
All,
I've got a Compaq ML570 with 2gb RAM, dual PIII Xeon 700s and 5x10k
RPM drives in it attached to a Compaq 5300 RAID card that I'm going to
be using as a squid box.
I've configured two drives as
Ryan Coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kurt Buff wrote:
[...]
I would recommend fBSD 6.3 instead of 7. You don't need it, unless you have
a documented reason it has to be 7.0
Please qualify that recommendation; as it stands, it is pure FUD.
--
Sahil Tandon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sahil Tandon wrote:
Ryan Coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kurt Buff wrote:
[...]
I would recommend fBSD 6.3 instead of 7. You don't need it, unless you have
a documented reason it has to be 7.0
Please qualify that recommendation; as it stands, it is pure FUD.
I don't
prad wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 23:17:05 -0400
David Gurvich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Many of these features have undiscovered bugs that you might
prefer not discovering on your own server.
oh oh.
but what if we are just running a plain webserver (mainly static html)
and email. we are
26 matches
Mail list logo