Re: [squid-users] Large ACLs and TCP_OUTGOING_ADDRESS

[Nyamul Hassan]

Thanks Amos.  The links were very insightful.

However, the 2500req/sec that ShuXin Zheng mentioned (and later achieved 
3500req/sec) was in a reverse proxy scenario.  Is that also the expected 
limit for a regular forward proxy?

I am also using regular commodity 4 x SATA 3.0 Gbps HDDs, compared to SCSI 
by ShuXin.  Given the speeds SATA can achieve these days, is there any 
thumbrule between comparing them?

Regards
HASSAN



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Amos Jeffries" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Nyamul Hassan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Amos Jeffries" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Squid Users" 
<squid-users@squid-cache.org>
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 08:56
Subject: Re: [squid-users] Large ACLs and TCP_OUTGOING_ADDRESS


Where could I find the "theoretical limits" publised by Adrian for 2.7?

Regards
HASSAN


Somewhere in squid-dev over the late 2007- early 2008 he pushed a graph
out comparing cacheboy and Squid-2.7 and Squid-2.HEAD.

All I can find right now is this thread:
 http://www.squid-cache.org/mail-archive/squid-dev/200701/0077.html
 http://www.squid-cache.org/mail-archive/squid-dev/200701/0083.html

And some old graphs on his cacheboy site:
 http://www.cacheboy.net/polygraph/cacheboy_1.4.pre3_test2/one-page.html
looks like he has scraped out another 50rps since the early reports.

One indicates squid is capable of ~500 RPS on regular home hardware. And
the other that a very old version was capable of >3500 RPS on high-end
hardware in 2006.

Amos