Re: [squid-users] peer weight about CARP

> >and a small informaition i need
> >as you see i give weight=1
> >to all peers
> >So if i want to give pref to some did i change it
> >to weight=3 for to be use more
> >then weight=2 next
> >and weight=1 for least
> >some places i saw the weight=70 or like this (did
> this
> >forward 70 req then go to weight=50
> >
>
> Weight doesn't do what you think it does. From the
> old docs:
>
> If more than one cache server has an object (based
> on the result of an
> ICP query), Squid decides which cache to get the
> data from the cache
> that responded fastest. If you want to prefer one
> cache over another,
> you can add a weight value to the preferred cache's
> config line. Larger
> values are preferred. Squid times how long each ICP
> request takes (in
> milliseconds), and divides the time by the weight
> value, using the cache
> with the smallest result. Your weight value should
> thus not be an
> unreasonable value.
>
> If you want to favor one cache_peer parent over an
> other, I think you
> have to utilize carp-load-factor instead of
> round-robin, which likely
> will require recompiling Squid. Run "squid -v" and
> look for --enable-carp.
>
> Chris
=============================
sir
after --enable-carp in configuration

did i change this only
cache_peer proxy.jub.com parent 8080 7 no-query
round-robin weigt=1
===TO=======
cache_peer proxy.jub.com parent 8080 7 no-query carp
weight=1

Is this OK or need to do some thing more

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Tue Jul 04 2006 - 00:58:20 MDT