With such hardware, it's highly recommended that you move to ATS from
Squid :)
My move from Squid to ATS :
- CentOS 64-bit with TPROXY support custom kernel ; stop Squid, install ATS.
- TPROXY works with "CONFIG proxy.config.http.server_port_attr STRING
=", no other kernel params changes than those with Squid.
- Sit back and relax. :)
Regards,
Alvin
On 02/06/2011 12:25, Steve Cole wrote:
I have a network based on L4 intercept using two squid servers that are
currently working quite well overall, but don't have a great deal of room to
progress given their workload and squid's limitations to do with scalability
and TPS.
The boxes:
dual quad-core xeons @ 2.4Ghz
48GB memory
12 x 15,000 rpm 128GB drives
dual gigabit ethernet
At present, the machines are set up with a large number of kernel params
tweaked and the squid process caches approximately 20GB of hot objects in
memory along with about 19GB of drive cache (proc size of 27GB). Peak
balanced load is in the neighbourhood of 1,000 requests per second between the
two machines, which use HTCP to peer.
I use virtually none of the content management features. Just caching.
Given the HTTP 1.1 capabilities of ATS, the more efficient storage system and
the higher scalability of the software, I'm considering moving to ATS to get
around the painfully slow speed of squid development and the painfully bad
HTTP 1.1 support along with lack of some features like range requests.
I'm aware that ATS is not a 1:1 drop-in, however it appears to do what I need
a cache to do: serve up content quickly, with low latency, and cache anything
that could potentially speed up the response time of the web.
So on to the questions:
I do not see any documentation on using the tproxy capabilities of 2.1x, are
they available for me to test my implementation?
Are there any kernel params that traffic server likes vs. squid? This made a
sizable difference in scalabilty in squid, FWIW.
Can ATS make good use of so much RAM (is it 64-bit aware?) Obviously disk
cache will not help since ATS uses raw devices in my desired implementation.
Has anyone built a system with ATS to such high specs for a forwarding proxy?
If anyone has, are there any tips for cache freshness& retention to share?
Will there be a Debian package soon/ever? I'd prefer this just for testing
purposes more than anything...!
Are there any benchmarks done on given hardware between Squid and ATS with
regards to content freshness, response times, scalability and overall
throughput for forwarding proxy?
If I find that ATS does what I need it to do, I'd like to step up and help
somehow. Perhaps documentation, as I'm no coder. FYI.
Thanks for the time, should anyone decide to help me out.
