>>>Robert Kiessling said:
--> Network Appliance claims that their NetCache is superior to Squid in
--> that it is more reliable, faster, has a better user interface and more
--> built-in statistics, fully supports HTTP/1.1, and includes all of
--> Squid's features (maybe I forgot some arguments). And it also runs
--> under NT, but that's nothing I'd need.
Actually, they are offering two things:
- NetCache, Peter Danzig's commercialized version. We have it in
operation as accelerator for a medium busy server without any real
problems. I guess, it is not suffering from featuritis like Squid
sometime tends to.
- A rather optimized NFS hardware
The figures they purport are quite impressive. Outperforms a standard
file system by a magnitude. Hotswap, RAID, snapshot horizons for
backups and a "spacy" design of the chassis included. :-)
Impressive also is it's price per GB.....but it might pay off if you
consider bandwith costs here on the continent.
Finally, they announced that a proxy will run native on this NFS thingy.
--> I would be interested in real-live experience about NetCache. Does it
--> really behave that much better as they want to make us believe? What
--> are the drawbacks (other than not having the source code)?
They offer test installations.
Anyway, optimal performance is not the only strategical issue. Having
access to the source *is* important. If you are under a spam attack
you cannot wait until your software manufacturer reacts.
\rho
PS: This reminds me on the line "if you want to be happy for the rest of
your life, never make a pretty woman your wife". A lot'a truth in there...
Received on Sun Jul 20 1997 - 04:51:45 MDT
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:35:48 MST