On Mon, 16 Mar 1998, Antony wrote:
> A little while ago I ran across a discussion which said that using
> "proxy-only" causes a rather large performance hit for the object being
> served.
>
> We're looking at setting up a parallel proxy configuration but naturally do
> not want to waste space by caching the same object on both machines.
>
> Does anyone know if this is still (or actually was) the case, and if so, if
> there are any plans to correct it?
From the Brisbane Ausbone caching discussion (courtesy Brent of BIT):
: Now, we also need to utilise the "ICP_HIT_STALE on" directive. And we
: can't really use the miss_access feature. This info has been garnered
: from http://squid.nlanr.net/Squid/Hierarchy-Tutorial/tutorial.html#toc8
which is *meant* to store one copy of a given URL in a cache cluster (if
they all have it set). To be honest, I'm not that crash hot on it but it
does appear to work.
--==--
Bruce.
Systems Administrator
Hub Communications.
Received on Sun Mar 15 1998 - 23:54:19 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:39:23 MST