Re: [squid-users] Squid 2.4.STABLE2 slowdown?

From: Visolve.com <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:13:23 +0530

Hello Ahsan Ali,

   The correct way for ipchains -L -M in iptables is
   " iptables -t nat -L -v " .

Regards,
-Kanchana
squid@visolve.com
www.visolve.com

Subject: Re: [squid-users] Squid 2.4.STABLE2 slowdown?

> Speaking of networking with Kernel 2.4.x - how can I see NAT connections
> going through my box?
>
> netstat -m doesn't work anymore... and neither does ipchains -L -M -
whats
> the correct way for iptables/netfilter?
>
> -Ahsan
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter Smith" <peter.smith@UTSouthwestern.edu>
> To: "Troels Arvin" <troels@tv2i.dk>
> Cc: <squid-users@squid-cache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 11:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [squid-users] Squid 2.4.STABLE2 slowdown?
>
>
> > Hmm that is a good possibility. I'll center my efforts more on getting
> > 2.4.x alive than trying to debug the 2.2.19/slowdowns I'm having.
> > Thanks for the help and good info!
> >
> > Peter Smith
> >
> >
> > Troels Arvin wrote:
> >
> > > Peter Smith <peter.smith@UTSouthwestern.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > >> File descriptor usage for squid:
> > >> Maximum number of file descriptors: 4096
> > >> Largest file desc currently in use: 791
> > >
> > >
> > >> Number of file desc currently in use: 700
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > That looks OK.
> > >
> > >> However since you mention kernel, I forgot to say in my original post
> > >> that I'm running a RH7.0 2.2.19-7.0.8smp kernel on my RH7.1 proxies.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > One of our Squid-boxes runs Red Hat 7.0 and uses
> > > "2.2.19-7.0.12enterprise" (latest official RH-kernel for RH 7.0).
> > >
> > > An other of our Squid boxes runs RH 7.1 and uses 2.4.9-12enterprise
> > > (latest official RH-kernel for RH 7.1).
> > >
> > > Both run fine. However, I wouldn't do what you do. There could be
> > > glibc<->kernel issues with our cocktail.
> > >
> > >> It sounds like this older kernel could be my limitting factor?
> > >
> > >
> > > Actually, I don't think that the 2.4 Linux kernel is that much more
> > > effecient than the 2.2 generation for my purposes. But I would not be
> > > surprised if you get trouble if you introduce a old kernel generation
> > > into a new Linux distribution tailored for the 2.4 kernel generation.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
Received on Sun Dec 09 2001 - 23:39:59 MST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 17:05:17 MST