Re: [squid-users] Benchmarks: ext3 vs. ReiserFS (fwd)

Alexey Talikov wrote:
> Hello Joe,
>
> What you can say about XFS and about raw fs for squid without
> additional overhead of metadata ( may be from XFS guys, I don't know exactly )

My understanding of the way XFS works leads me to believe it would be
significantly slower than even ext3 for Squid usage patterns.

There is no storage backend for Squid to support a raw filesystem access
to XFS, though there were some experiments done with some success not
quite two years ago to make Squid work with a raw ReiserFS filesystem
interface. It made about a 20% difference in performance (though many
other tweaks went into it at both the kernel and Squid level).

Someone would have to write the code, and I would expect something like
COSS to be more effective for Squid, even though it doesn't eliminate
the meta data overhead entirely the way a raw filesystem interface could.

-- 
Joe Cooper <joe@swelltech.com>
Web caching appliances and support.
http://www.swelltech.com