Hi, Thanks for your answers
i'm using both memory caching and file caching, but if i use ffs or ffs2 (and optimization options), squid saturate the FS. The only solution i found is to use file caching on mfs. -- Best regards, Loïc BLOT, Engineering UNIX Systems, Security and Network Engineer http://www.unix-experience.fr Le mardi 06 mai 2014 à 08:36 +0100, Stuart Henderson a écrit : > On 2014/05/06 09:28, Janne Johansson wrote: > > dd would perhaps not be the end goal for any memory filesystem, but the > > major point is that when you remove files, tmpfs will (try to) return the > > memory to the OS, where mfs will not. > > When used for things like port build directories or cvs /tmp, tmpfs > performs better. On the other hand, at present mfs is more stable. > > > 2014-05-06 8:28 GMT+02:00 Loïc Blot <[email protected]>: > > > My benchs (with dd) are showing that tmpfs is slower than mfs. (/tmp: > > > tmpfs | /var/squid/cache: mfs), i've done many dd to test it, and i > > > always have the same results > > I'm not sure I understand why you'd prefer to point squid at any type of > memory filesystem rather than use its internal memory caching?
