[squid-users] Recommended Multi-CPU Configuration

[Michael Pelletier]

Which one would be good for capacity\load? I have a very, very large
environment. I have 220,000 users on 8 Gig to the INTERNET. I am running a
load balancer, ipvsadm (Direct Routing) with 20 proxies behind it. I am
interested in handling load.

Michael

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Amos Jeffries <squid3 at treenet.co.nz> wrote:

> On 18/06/2015 8:53 a.m., Michael Pelletier wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am looking to had some more power to squid. I have seen two different
> > types of configurations to do this:
> >
> > 1. Adding workers directive equal to the number of cpus. Then adding a
> > special wrapper around the AUFS disk cache so that the correct worker can
> > only access the correct cache. Yes, I know rock is multi cpu capable.
> >
> > 2. Using the split configuration from the Squid Web page. This involved a
> > front end and multiple backend squid servers on the same server.
> > http://wiki.squid-cache.org/ConfigExamples/MultiCpuSystem
> >
> > My question is, which one is recommended? What are the pros and cons of
> > each?
> >
>
> Both and neither. #1 improves bandwidth savings. #2 improves raw speed.
> Pick your poison.
>
> These are example configurations only. For real high performance mutiple
> machines in a mix of the two setups is even better.
>
> Amos
>
> _______________________________________________
> squid-users mailing list
> squid-users at lists.squid-cache.org
> http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
>

-- 


*Disclaimer: *Under Florida law, e-mail addresses are public records. If 
you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public 
records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, 
contact this office by phone or in writing.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squid-cache.org/pipermail/squid-users/attachments/20150617/7c9fa282/attachment.html>