Re: [squid-users] Slow cache

On Wed, 2005-01-05 at 16:50, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-01-05 at 11:10, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > > I'd recomend using bigger disk cache - for accomodating week's traffic you
> > > should have 30GB cache imho. Tuning up filesystem may help too, using xfs
> > > or reisersfs (with notail option) on cache disk and probably use dedicated
> > > cache drive.
>
> On 05.01 14:44, Ow Mun Heng wrote:
> > Nope... The book - "Squid - the definitive guide" shows that ext3 is
> > still faster then reiserfs.
> >
> > Search the archives for the bit which I wrote and quoted from the book
>
> I remember that this was mentioned some time ago here. I just do not
> believe it for now. Maybe if I'll do my own tests, or if someone will make
> tests I would trust...
>
> does the book SHOW that ext3 is the best, or does it SAY that it's the
> best? :)

Yeah.. It SHOWS via nice graphs.

But it's on old Hardware and on 2.4 kernels

-- 
Ow Mun Heng
Gentoo/Linux on DELL D600 1.4Ghz 
98% Microsoft(tm) Free!! 
Neuromancer 17:47:34 up 8:45, 5 users, 
load average: 0.42, 0.50, 0.45