Re: [squid-users] large storage

> Do you really need that large storage in a single Squid proxy? There is
> very little return when growing the cache beyond 1 weeks worth of content.

i get now around 24% bytehitratio other compititors in my country is getting
around 40% with 1TB cache using cacheflow

> The upper limit depends on your OS and architecture
i am using now FreeBSD 4.8. and planning also to use FreeBSD for the machine
(either 4.9 or 5.2 when released)

i think freebsd support upto 2GB for single process right?
if so what is the recomended 32-bit OS

btw can COSS be a future solution or not?

Netguy

----- Original Message -----
From: "Henrik Nordstrom" <hno@squid-cache.org>
To: "Netguy" <netguy@saudi.net.sa>
Cc: <squid-users@squid-cache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 12:06 PM
Subject: Re: [squid-users] large storage

> On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Netguy wrote:
>
> > i am planning to buy a machine with large storage (around 1 or 2
> > tera-byte) and running it as squid proxy.
>
> Do you really need that large storage in a single Squid proxy? There is
> very little return when growing the cache beyond 1 weeks worth of content.
>
> > i have now a machine with 125GB cache with cache_mem set to 256 and the
> > squid process grows up to 1.3GB. the problem is in my openion in the
> > memory because the squid process will grow above 2GB and this will crash
> > it.
>
> The upper limit depends on your OS and architecture:
>
> Some Intel OS:es allow for processes up to around 3GB in size.
>
> If you run on a 64-bit architecture then process size is virtually
> unlimited. But on the other hand Squid is very limited tested in 64-bit
> environments, and it is also a fact that the memory requirements increases
> significantly when going to 64 bits as many of the cache index fields is
> word size dependent, causing a memory requirements increase of at least
> 50% more on 64-bit architectures compared to 32-bit architectures.
>
> Regards
> Henrik
>
Received on Tue Nov 04 2003 - 02:28:17 MST