Re: [squid-users] 3.3.x - 3.4.x: huge performance regression

2015-01-12 Thread Eugene M. Zheganin
Hi. On 12.01.2015 16:03, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: Hi. Just to point this out in the correct thread - to all the people who replied here - Steve Hill has provided a patch for a 3.4.x that solves the most performance degradation issue. 3.4.x is still performing poorly comparing to the 3.3.x

Re: [squid-users] 3.3.x - 3.4.x: huge performance regression

2014-11-10 Thread Diego Woitasen
Info added to the bug report. On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 7:53 PM, Diego Woitasen di...@woitasen.com.ar wrote: Hi, I have more information. The testing environment has a few users. We switched to basic authencation and it's been working for a week without any issues. A couple of days ago we

Re: [squid-users] 3.3.x - 3.4.x: huge performance regression

2014-10-23 Thread Eliezer Croitoru
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hey, What is the network load? how many users? Have you been using workers at all in the past? Can you see the avg requests per second on the cache manager page? Eliezer On 10/22/2014 09:02 AM, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: Hi. I was using the

Re: [squid-users] 3.3.x - 3.4.x: huge performance regression

2014-10-23 Thread masterx81
Same here, i'm waiting the right time to go to the customer and try the debug suggested by Amos Jeffries on 3.4.x codes to help to find where is the performance issue. -- View this message in context:

[squid-users] 3.3.x - 3.4.x: huge performance regression

2014-10-22 Thread Eugene M. Zheganin
Hi. I was using the 3.4.x branch for quite some time, it was working just fine on small installations. Yesterday I upgraded my largest cache installation from 3.3.13 to 3.4.8 (same config, diskd, NTLM/GSS-SPNEGO auth helpers, external helpers). Today morning I noticed that squid is spiking to