As you see the out of object dump in my previous mail, there is no client
fetching the object.
If an object has clients fetching it, object dump should print out the
client list information too, if any.
In addition, at the dump time, squid had no client connection.
-----Original Message-----
From: adrian.chadd_at_gmail.com [mailto:adrian.chadd_at_gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Adrian Chadd
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 10:42 AM
To: taehwan.weon_at_gmail.com
Cc: squid-users_at_squid-cache.org
Subject: Re: [squid-users] (help!) strange things about
maximum_object_size_in_memory in squid.conf
If it hasn't been swapped out to disk, the object has to stay in RAM
until the client(s) currently fetching from it have fetched enough for
part of the object (ie, the stuff at the beginning which has been sent
to clients) to be freed.
Adrian
2009/1/20 Taehwan Weon <taehwan.weon_at_gmail.com>:
> Hi,
>
> I am using squid 2.6.STABLE 21 on linux.
> my squid.conf has the following settings:
> maximum_object_size_in_memory 10 KB
> cache_mem 3072 MB
> maximum_object_size 2000 MB
> minimum_object_size 0
>
> After running squid for more than 1 months, I ran 'squidclient ....
> mgr:vm_objects' to
> look at the transit/hot object size.
>
> Even if I SET the maximum in-memory object size to 10 KB,
> squid HAD the following objects! (the diff of inmem_lo and inmem_hi is
299KB)
>
>
> KEY CD0154B911563741E3E69CDB2E2D6FF0
> GET http://images.test.com/test_data/61/99/319.jpg
> STORE_OK IN_MEMORY SWAPOUT_NONE PING_DONE
> CACHABLE,DISPATCHED,VALIDATED
> LV:1232416172 LU:1232417107 LM:1231909989 EX:-1
> 0 locks, 0 clients, 6 refs
> Swap Dir -1, File 0XFFFFFFFF
> inmem_lo: 0
> inmem_hi: 299187
> swapout: 0 bytes queued
>
>
> In Squid, The Definitive Guide published by O'Reilly,
> maximum_object_size_in_memory is the diff of inmem_lo and inmem_hi.
> But the real implementation is seemed to be strange.
>
> Any help will be highly appreciated.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Tawan Won
>
>
Received on Wed Jan 21 2009 - 03:21:49 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Jan 22 2009 - 12:00:03 MST