Re: Squid is OK, but which UNIX for high loads?

In article <01BC66CD.59BFEB90@dima.cyberia.net.lb> you write:

>I'm using Squid 1.1.10 on a PPro 200MHZ + 256MB RAM, Linux 2.0.29.
>Squid was running OK for month (started with 1.1.0), until recently, =
>problems started as the load increased (~70,000 connections/hour). =
>Symptoms:
>1. Squid's response time increased dramatically. Telnetting to port 8082 =
>(the cache port) takes 3-4 seconds on the command line for the =
>"Connected.." string to appear.=20
>2. Even when connected, Squid takes 3-4 seconds to retrieve even cached =
>objects!

I have experienced the same problems when I was running Squid on a
Sparc20, 384MB memory with Solaris 2.5.1 and around 50000 conns/hour. As
soon as the number of open connections came above a certain level,
performanced dropped to even worse numbers than yours (>20 secs for
small-sized cache hits).

>It was suggested that this may be a problem with Squid, so we upgraded =
>to 1.1.10 (we were running 1.1.8). It was also suggested that this may =
>be a Linux problem, so we upgraded to 2.0.30 (which has the ISS). =
>Performance improved, but the delays were still unacceptable. Note that =
>memory is abundant (I always have 70-80 Megs free physical RAM) and CPU =
>load rarely goes beyond 1.

>I want to keep my existing hardware, which leaves me with 2 choices: NT =
>and Solaris x86 (Don't want FreeBSD). NT is a no-no, but=20

Why don't you want FreeBSD? Did you ever try it? I replaced the
Sparc/Solaris setup with a PPRO200/128MB with FreeBSD 2.2.1 for a few days
and the response times for the small-sized cache hits went down from >20
secs to <300 milliseconds... I'm now using BSD/OS 3.0 (also BSD4.4
derived) because the company wanted a commercial OS.

>Is Solaris x86 2.5.1 recommended for such a setup?

I've never tried Solaris on x86. But why not try the available options for
some time and then make your decision? And if you need some tuning tips for
FreeBSD or BSD/OS, contact me.

Arjan
Received on Thu May 22 1997 - 15:42:45 MDT