Re: [squid-users] low squid throughput/scalability

At 01:17 AM 3/11/2006, Kevin wrote:
>On 3/10/06, Mike Leong <leongmzlist@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm using squid as an accelerator/reverse proxy server lots and lots of
> > small files (~20K each)
> >
> > I used siege ( http://www.joedog.org/siege/ )to benchmark squid and got
> > some pretty disappointing results: only 2.5mb/sec throughput.
>
>Could you explain the design decisions behind the unusual RAID0 configuration?

Well, if I do 1 giant raid0 config, and if 1 disk goes bad, entire array (1
terrabyte) is lost. Spreading the risk here.

>My first thought is that the siege application is doing something odd.
> It appears the "-c" variable doesn't actually set concurrent
>connections, as seen by the low concurrency value in the results.
>Also,the 3 second "longest transaction" time may indicate a problem
>with the network or TCP/IP layer.
>
>One good test would be to configure an Apache or Athttpd server on the
>Squid machine to serve up one ore more 20KB static files, and run the
>same benchmark against that server directly. If Athttpd performs no
>better than Squid, the performance issue is not Squid's.
>
>Another possibility would be to try the same test using a different
>tool, for example http_load -parallel 100 -seconds 300 urls.txt
I'll give that a try.

> > The squid server and test machine is connected via 100mbps link. During
> > the test, the server cpu load is near zero. IO Wait is less than 10%. All
> > the requests were TCP_OFFLINE_HITs, according to top, swap is not
> > used. From teh benchmarks, it seems max throuput is 2.5mb/sec, kinda low
> > for such a power server.
> >
> > Any comments/ideas?
>
>When I see TCP throughput on a FastEthernet link top out at 25
>megabits, the first thing I suspect is a duplex mismatch :)
I get 100mbps speed if I scp a large file from server ->
client. Definitely not cabling/nic issues.

>Kevin
Received on Sat Mar 11 2006 - 14:46:20 MST