Please note I am not part of the team that looks after ATS. I started using ATS soon after it was made available.
Up to a couple of months ago we couldn't get ATS to work with ICP and the responses I got from the list was that it is still broken. On 17/11/2011 07:59, "Jan Algermissen" <[email protected]> wrote: >Mav, > >On Nov 15, 2011, at 6:31 PM, Mav Peri wrote: > >> We are using ATS in production and we have seen it serving up to around >>up to 5k requests per second on dynamic content. This was in a cluster >>of EC2 instances and not a single physical server with several objects >>being in the kb. >> >> It works well but if the origin server becomes congested ATS is missing >>functionality to serve stale if congested. I have observed that this >>results in ATS being unable to catch up under heavy load even if the >>origin server is not congested. Eventually it does catch up but the >>behaviour is far from desirable. >> >> Another big limitation at present is that the ICP functionality is >>broken and there is no proper documentation on implementing parent http >>(if that would be suitable) so you will have to rely on trial and error >>and any help the guys on this mailing can provide. The lack of ICP is >>not to be underestimated. > >I did not find this in the issues list and the docs[1] suggest ICP is >there. You say this as if it was a well-known issue - can you explain or >send a pointer? > >Jan > > > >[1] http://trafficserver.apache.org/docs/v2/admin/hier.htm#ICPPeering > > > > >> It is a waste of resources which increases load on your origin servers. >> >> From: Ron Tsoref <[email protected]> >> Reply-To: <[email protected]> >> Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 18:44:03 +0200 >> To: <[email protected]> >> Subject: Real-world numbers >> >> Has anybody released numbers of ATS performance in real-world scenario? >>I mean, performance of ATS serving images, CSS/JavaScript files, etc. (I >>don't mean 100 bytes objects servering performance, as this the only >>thing I found.) >> >> Anything related to the subject is more than welcome! >> >> Ron >> >> ______________________________________________________________________ >> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. >> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email >> ______________________________________________________________________ > > >______________________________________________________________________ >This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. >For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email >______________________________________________________________________
