richard@iguana.co.nz wrote:
> I'm using squid heavily as an HTTP/S accelerator, and my current
> development target is a load-balancing/failover backend for squid
> supporting virtual hosts.
Cool.
> I am currently building this on the 2.3stable4 source, because I need to
> use it pretty much now :) What is the opinion of the list on the stability
> of the devel trees for acceleration at this stage? would it be
> advantageous for me to work on that tree instead, or is a forward port
> (theres not a lot of code really, its just working out the right places to
> put everything :) likely to be easy enough?
Forward port most likely is quite easy to 2.4/2.5 if you are changing
the parts I think you are.
> The other question is whether you guys think this is appropriate for squid
> itself. I'm doing it no matter what, I need it :) But if you don't think
> its appropriate for the engine itself I can maintain it as a seperate
> patch or something.
Support for smarter load balancing algorithms in the forwarding
selection sure is appropriate, especially when running accelerators.
/Henrik
Received on Tue Oct 03 2000 - 00:01:05 MDT
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:12:40 MST