Hi Given that most VPS setups give you a lot of disk and relatively little RAM, "-s file" makes a lot of sense. Varnish is more efficient than HTTPD. VCL gives you a layer of control in front of the server to do stuff that otherwise can be tough to layer. All of that is a good thing on a cramped little server setup.
Bob On Nov 27, 2010, at 3:33 AM, Chris Hecker wrote: > > My guess on "-s file" is that a lot of users might be like me, which is to > say I'm using varnish to take the load off httpd for a few vhost websites on > a single wimpy machine, but I don't have insane traffic or anything, it's > just that varnish is sooo much more efficient than httpd that it still makes > sense. > > Not sure if the survey could separate out the user types and correlate the > cache type with those types, but it might be interesting. > > Chris > > > > On 2010/11/26 07:41, Angelo Höngens wrote: >> Per wrote in his survey result: "62% use -s file, which I find somewhat >> surprising. -s file doesn't really perform that well under pressure on >> rotating hard drives due to some changes in recent Linux and FreeBSD >> kernels." >> >> But does anyone have a link to (or write up) some explanation for dummies on >> cache file types? I know there's 'file' and 'malloc', but I don't know the >> difference or the pros and cons. >> >> I tried searching the wiki, but I my google-fu lacks sometimes ;) >> > > _______________________________________________ > varnish-misc mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.varnish-cache.org/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc _______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.varnish-cache.org/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
