Re: Performance question

On Mon, 14 Jun 1999, Andy Dills wrote:

> So, considering this, why should I even consider squid?

1) Many people do not need performance above 100 req/sec
2) You can cluster several Squids to do more req/sec for less price
3) Squid has lots of features no other proxy has
4) Squid has better support than any other proxy has

> Why shouldn't I just use peregrine?

Because you should read Peregrine's README file first, including the
"Status of Feature Implementation" section. You should also understand that
even given Pei's very talented team and superior software language, the
number of software bugs is reciprocal to the number of software users. You
should consider Peregrine, but not "just use" it.

Personally, I am very happy for Pei and her team. They are developing a
very interesting cache, and I hope they will succeed. Peregrine is probably
not ready for full-scale production use yet, but it had a very promising
start.

> The bakeoff had them, with a similar machine to the one I'm
> considering, at 150+ reqs/s.

Performance is not the only factor to consider. For example, the bake-off
version of Peregrine did not have persistent (through failures) store. It
is fixed in the current version, but the example illustrates my point.

> This level of service is what I'm looking for, but I want free :> Squid
> and peregrine seem to be my only choices, and the numbers on peregrine
> look better. So what is it that I get when I go with squid that I don't
> get when I go with Peregrine? And likewise, how is it that some class
> project is better than something that has been worked on by several people
> for several years?

Peregrine is not a class project and had an advantage on using hundreds of
tips and tricks from Squid source code. Also, Squid performance side used
to be an underground project for several years. There are many reasons why
Peregrine _performs_ better on _some_ workloads. If you consider all the
factors, you will beta-test Peregrine and production-run Squid. By the time
you are done with beta testing Peregrine, Squid will catch up on the
performance side, and Peregrine might go commercial...

> Not trying to bust anybody's balls, just curious.

I gave you pretty obvious reasons. I am sure you can understand the other
factors if you dig a bit deeper than the two numbers on a bake-off report.
As for balls busting factor, you are somewhat safer with Peregrine's team.

$0.02,
 
Alex.
Received on Mon Jun 14 1999 - 22:58:02 MDT