Yes, Squid request status in access log is TCP_HIT:NONE. Squid and apache run on same server, and apache ab command runs on another server.
2007/7/20, Marcos Camões Bourgeaiseau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Are you sure the test page was already in the squid cache? If it was not, you have answer , as squid had to fetch the page in your apache serve. Try the test again and see the results. By the way, the servers have the same hardware configuration and similar performance? 程卫星 wrote: > I use apache 2.0.59 and squid 2.6.STABLE13, and test with apache's ab > command: > ab -n 100000 -c 50 http://***/header.jpg > When use apache only, the result is: > -------------------- > Concurrency Level: 50 > Time taken for tests: 2.805669 seconds > Complete requests: 10000 > Failed requests: 0 > Write errors: 0 > Total transferred: 325499626 bytes > HTML transferred: 321909602 bytes > Requests per second: 3564.21 [#/sec] (mean) > Time per request: 14.028 [ms] (mean) > Time per request: 0.281 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) > Transfer rate: 113295.61 [Kbytes/sec] received > ------------------------- > When use squid with apache, test result is: > ------------------------- > Concurrency Level: 50 > Time taken for tests: 3.739039 seconds > Complete requests: 10000 > Failed requests: 0 > Write errors: 0 > Total transferred: 326745046 bytes > HTML transferred: 322174102 bytes > Requests per second: 2674.48 [#/sec] (mean) > Time per request: 18.695 [ms] (mean) > Time per request: 0.374 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) > Transfer rate: 85339.04 [Kbytes/sec] received > ------------------------------ > So my question is: why squid is slower than apache? Thanks. > -- Marcos Camões Bourgeaiseau - KIKO e-mail normal: [EMAIL PROTECTED] e-mail para anexos grandes: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
