On Fri, 14 Nov 1997, Miles Lott wrote:
> Having run Squid for a couple of weeks, and now using Apache to serve a
> single document to the masses, I am wondering what is the advantage of
> Squid vs using Apache's caching feature? Is is performance or the
> ability to join a cache hierarchy? Granted it has been a relatively
> trouble-free operation. I am just curious as to your feelings or fact
> pointers. This is as relates to caching for a medium-sized corporate
> LAN using a tiny ISDN trickle...
I started out proxying using the CERN proxy, then switched to Apache for
performance reasons, then switched to Squid, again for performance
reasons.
This is not to say I have anything against the Apache proxy cache, I've
contributed to its debugging, but the fact that Squid is a single process,
and uses memory-based hot-object-caching, appealed to me, as did the cache
manager interface. I've also put its heirarchy feature to very good use
-- all my Internet traffic goes right past an upstream cache on its way
out anyway, and peering with them improved my performance futher.
-Mike Pelletier.
Received on Mon Nov 17 1997 - 06:48:09 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:37:39 MST