On Tuesday 22 January 2002 04:30 pm, Joe Cooper wrote:
[snip]
> Seriously though, Squid 2.4STABLE3 is pretty good, and what I'm
> deploying today. 2.2STABLE5+hno is still faster, and more stable in
> most environments, as well...but none the less the feature set of
> 2.4STABLE3 is enough better that it's worth giving up a little speed.
Given your confident tone about 2.4STABLE3 (which I agree with), why did
you run a beta version of Squid 2.5 in the 4th Cache-Off?
Thanks.
Received on Tue Jan 22 2002 - 20:48:58 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 17:05:54 MST