RE: [squid-users] Which the best OS for Squid?

I realize that and agree. My situation was screwy because of the server
I'm running squid on.
It has several internal partitions that are used for bios/post which
disallowed me to set up partitions the
way I wanted to.

Not to mention the fact that this was really just a test squid box that I
had tuned to the point where we were satisfied with it being in
production.
It's in the works to have the services transferred to our new server
platform standard, from which squid WILL have its own disks.

I guess I just wanted to clarify for myself, and anyone else interested,
that (like the document states) setting the 'noatime' mount parameter is
contingent
on the squid cache being on its own disk(s).

Tim Rainier
Information Services, Kalsec, INC
trainier@kalsec.com

"Chris Robertson" <crobertson@gci.com> wrote on 10/11/2005 03:06:09 PM:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: trainier@kalsec.com [mailto:trainier@kalsec.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 10:27 AM
> > To: squid-users@squid-cache.org
> > Subject: Re: [squid-users] Which the best OS for Squid?
> > Henrik Nordstrom <hno@squid-cache.org> wrote on 10/11/2005
> > 10:07:21 AM:
> >
> > > On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 trainier@kalsec.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > This is more of a filesystem question, then it is an operating
> > > > system/distro question.
> > > > Based on my research, the benchmarks on the web claim ReiserFS to
> > provide
> > > > up to 15-20% faster results.
> > > >
> > > > I've not had any time to do any benchmarking. My cache
> > is currently
> > > > running on an ext3 partition running
> > > > under SLES8 SP3
> > >
> > > Regardless of which filesystem you select the most important tuning
> > aspect
> > > for filesystem performance for Squid (after selection of
> > hardware) is
> > the
> > > noatime mount option.
> > >
> > > A more complete list, in priority order:
> > >
> > > 1. Amount of memory available
> > >
> > > 2. Number of harddrives used for cache
> > >
> > > 3. noatime mount option
> > >
> > > 4. type of filesystem (except for a few really bad choices).
> > >
> > >
> > > On systems with syncronous directory updates (Solaris, some BSD
> > versions)
> > >
> > > 1.5 Mount option to enable asyncronous directory updates, or
> > preferably
> > > a filesystem meta journal on a separate device taking the heat of
> > > directory updates.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Henrik
> >
> >
> >
> > What if the squid cache is stored on the "/" partition?
> > Wouldn't that be a hideous mistake to set "/" to 'noatime' ?
> >
> > Tim Rainier
> > Information Services, Kalsec, INC
> > trainier@kalsec.com
> >
> >
>
> If you are concerned enough about the performance of Squid to use
> the noatime option, Squid should not only have its own partition, it
> should have its own disks. Having Squid's cache on "/" indicates
> (to me) a multi-use box, not a dedicated Squid server. Notice as
> well, the recommendation for mounting Squid's cache noatime falls
> below having multiple disks for cache.
>
> Chris
>
> Chris
Received on Tue Oct 11 2005 - 13:45:34 MDT