On 13.10 10:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > kalproxy:/var/log/squid # free -m
> > > total used free sharedbuffers cached
> > > Mem: 1007995 12 0 4 33
> > > -/+ buffers/cache:957 50
> > > Swap: 102
> On Thursday 13 October 2005 13:52, Rodrigo A B Freire wrote:
> > Not to mention that when a squid -k rotate is issued (or a -k
> > reconfigure), the process may grow up to 2x the amount of its size
> > for a few seconds... If you don't have swap enough to buffer this
> > grow, the proxy will
> What is it about browsing the web that's not fast
> enough?
> It could simply be that authentication routines are
> slowing it down.
It's not slow at all. There doesn't even seem to a speed decrease
without the cache at all. I was just wondering the benefits of having a
cache. The architect
> > kalproxy:/var/log/squid # free -m
> > total used free sharedbuffers cached
> > Mem: 1007995 12 0 4 33
> > -/+ buffers/cache:957 50
> > Swap: 1027 18 1008
> I call this "running low
On Thursday 13 October 2005 13:52, Rodrigo A B Freire wrote:
> Not to mention that when a squid -k rotate is issued (or a -k
> reconfigure), the process may grow up to 2x the amount of its size
> for a few seconds... If you don't have swap enough to buffer this
> grow, the proxy will die miser
le to allocate xxx
bytes.
My own (hard-learned) experience.
- Original Message -
From: "Kinkie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Raymond A. Meijer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 7:06 AM
Subject: Re: [squid-users] Which the best OS f
On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 10:25 +0300, Raymond A. Meijer wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 October 2005 23:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > kalproxy:/var/log/squid # free -m
> > Swap: 1027 18 1008
>
> You'd better disable swap on your Squid box. You don't want Squid to be
> swapped ou
> On Wednesday 12 October 2005 23:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > kalproxy:/var/log/squid # free -m
> > Swap: 1027 18 1008
On 13.10 10:25, Raymond A. Meijer wrote:
> You'd better disable swap on your Squid box. You don't want Squid to be
> swapped out to disk...
Linux is q
On 12.10 16:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On a side-note. Your 4x33 are set up as RAID or LVM?
> > neither one is a good idea.
> > http://www.squid-cache.org/Doc/FAQ/FAQ-3.html#ss3.11
>
> Indeed. I was making sure he wasn't raiding his squid cache. :-)
>
> >if your computes has enough of mem
On Wednesday 12 October 2005 23:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> kalproxy:/var/log/squid # free -m
> Swap: 1027 18 1008
You'd better disable swap on your Squid box. You don't want Squid to be
swapped out to disk...
Ray
diskd /usr/local/squid/var/cachee 38000 16 256 Q1=70 Q2=80
Got it? ;-)
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 5:54 PM
Subject: Re: [squid-users] Which the best OS for Squid?
Oh. You're running 4 seperate caches?
Yeah, I could
quid-cache.org
cc
Subject
Re: [squid-users] Which the best OS for Squid?
On 12.10 10:03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The fact is, we're small enough that it hasn't sorely affected us much
at
> all. My access log for squid grows to about 4-10 GB in a week.
wow, that's very
rds,
Rodrigo.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 11:03 AM
Subject: Re: [squid-users] Which the best OS for Squid?
> Oh yeah. I definitely see the advantages.
>
> The fact is, we're small enough that it hasn
On 12.10 10:03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The fact is, we're small enough that it hasn't sorely affected us much at
> all. My access log for squid grows to about 4-10 GB in a week.
wow, that's very much of data transferred in a week.
> I made it adimently clear that I would only retain 1 weeks
ion routines).
On a side-note. Your 4x33 are set up as RAID or LVM?
Tim Rainier
Information Services, Kalsec, INC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Rodrigo A B Freire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10/11/2005 10:52 PM
To
cc
Subject
Re: [squid-users] Which the best OS for Squid?
In my cache
y, October 11, 2005 1:20 PM
> > To: squid-users@squid-cache.org
> > Subject: Re: [squid-users] Which the best OS for Squid?
> >
> >
> > First off, there's no possible way my cache would "fill" the '/'
> > partition. There's a cache s
ore disks isn't an option). Both of them with
"noatime" ;-)
Best regards,
Rodrigo.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 6:19 PM
Subject: Re: [squid-users] Which the best OS for Squid?
First off, there's no poss
Thirdly, can someone PLEASE answer my question about setting "/" to
'noatime', as opposed to avoiding it by telling me how and why what
I'm
doing
is stupid?
Once again, are there pitfalls to having '/' set to 'noatime'?
If your squid box is only used for Squid then there are *probably* no
pi
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 1:20 PM
> To: squid-users@squid-cache.org
> Subject: Re: [squid-users] Which the best OS for Squid?
>
>
> First off, there's no possible
On 10/11/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I mean, honestly, who would run a 146GB cache?
We would. But instead we run three 73GB caches in parallel :)
> Thirdly, can someone PLEASE answer my question about setting "/" to
> 'noatime', as opposed to avoiding it by telling me how
'/' set to 'noatime'?
:-)
Tim Rainier
Information Services, Kalsec, INC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Joost de Heer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10/11/2005 05:07 PM
Please respond to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc
squid-users@squid-cache.org
Subject
Re: [squid
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> What if the squid cache is stored on the "/" partition?
That's a bad idea. Your cache could potentially fill up the root partition.
> Wouldn't that be a hideous mistake to set "/" to 'noatime' ?
Wouldn't it be a hideous mistake to put the cache on the same partition as
it would necessarily
"speed up squid".
Tim Rainier
Information Services, Kalsec, INC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Covington, Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10/11/2005 03:49 PM
To
"Squid Users"
cc
Subject
Re: [squid-users] Which the best OS for Squid?
> This is more
> This is more of a filesystem question, then it is an operating
> system/distro question.
Let's say one is using Squid primarily for access control. What
benefits would a cache provide? Would eliminating the cache help speed
up squid, assuming there is ample bandwidth?
---
Chris Covington
IT
Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 10:27 AM
> > To: squid-users@squid-cache.org
> > Subject: Re: [squid-users] Which the best OS for Squid?
> > Henrik Nordstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 10:27 AM
> To: squid-users@squid-cache.org
> Subject: Re: [squid-users] Which the best OS for Squid?
> Henrik Nordstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 1
What if the squid cache is stored on the "/" partition?
Wouldn't that be a hideous mistake to set "/" to 'noatime' ?
Tim Rainier
Information Services, Kalsec, INC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Henrik Nordstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 10/11/2005 10:07:21 AM:
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is more of a filesystem question, then it is an operating
system/distro question.
Based on my research, the benchmarks on the web claim ReiserFS to provide
up to 15-20% faster results.
I've not had any time to do any benchmarking. My cache is c
This is more of a filesystem question, then it is an operating
system/distro question.
Based on my research, the benchmarks on the web claim ReiserFS to provide
up to 15-20% faster results.
I've not had any time to do any benchmarking. My cache is currently
running on an ext3 partition running
On Thu, 6 Oct 2005, Sushil Deore wrote:
I've tried squid on all the FC's i.e. FC-1,FC-2 & the latest is on FC-3
which works fine.
Have had a couple of reports that the aufs disk I/O performance suffers on
FC-3 and later using NPTL. But I have not verified this myself yet.
Regards
Henrik
te:
> > * On 06/10/05 23:25 +1300, D & E Radel wrote:
> > >
> > > - Original Message -
> > > From: "Askar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: "Bonnici Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Cc:
> >
Cc:
> > Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 11:09 PM
> > Subject: Re: [squid-users] Which the best OS for Squid?
> >
> >
> > >Bonnici Daniel wrote:
> > >
> > >>Hi, which is the best linux OS for security and to run squid??
> > >>
>
I found FC as the most convenient for squid as I am running it from a long
time and so far no cribs... :)
I've tried squid on all the FC's i.e. FC-1,FC-2 & the latest is on FC-3
which works fine.
-- Sushil.
> Hi, which is the best linux OS for security and to run squid??
This is a matter of opinion. Mine is that gentoo is the best for squid.
emerge squid and you're all done. When updates come out for squid or
it's dependencies, as with your whole installed package base aka "world"
in general, you
d I'm only
serving local clients.
Rob
- Original Message -
From: "D & E Radel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Askar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Bonnici Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 12:25
Subject: Re: [s
e are
***
D & E Radel wrote:
- Original Message - From: "Askar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Bonnici Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 11:09 PM
Subject: Re: [squid-users
* On 06/10/05 23:25 +1300, D & E Radel wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Askar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Bonnici Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 11:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [squid-users] W
- Original Message -
From: "Askar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Bonnici Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 11:09 PM
Subject: Re: [squid-users] Which the best OS for Squid?
Bonnici Daniel wrote:
Hi, which is the best linux
Bonnici Daniel wrote:
Hi, which is the best linux OS for security and to run squid??
cheers
Daniel
www.slackware.com
coz it follows KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) ;)
regards
Askar
39 matches
Mail list logo
