Re: [squid-users] cache disk failure handling?

Squid will probably crash.

RAID1 is an acceptable comprimise and may improve IO throughput
slightly.

I've got a goal to get some alternate storage code going in the next
6 to 12 months which will make a future codebase handle this sort
of situation better.

Adrian

On Mon, Jan 28, 2008, Chris Woodfield wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Reading the squid FAQ, it's obvious to me that putting cache_dirs on a
> RAID (particularly RAID5) has serious performance penalties and is
> highly discouraged. However, what's not as clear is how squid deals
> with single-disk failures and whether or not it handles failures
> gracefully enough to obviate the need for RAID.
>
> If I have a squid running multiple cache_dirs on single disks, and one
> disk suffers a failure, how does squid respond? Will it simply stop
> using that cache_dir and soldier on, or can this cause an application
> crash?
>
> Also, when starting up squid, what is the effect of an unavailable
> cache_dir? I'm thinking of a situation where squid is restarted before
> a bad disk can be replaced.
>
> If squid does have problems here, could using pairs of RAID1
> partitions be an acceptable compromise, with the cost of reduced total
> storage?
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Chris
>

-- 
- Xenion - http://www.xenion.com.au/ - VPS Hosting - Commercial Squid Support -
- $25/pm entry-level VPSes w/ capped bandwidth charges available in WA -