Re: Cacheoff results published.

Hans Reiser wrote:
>
> Joe Cooper wrote:
>
> >
> > Chris at OCD worked out an extremely low license price for ICS (which is
> > normally $750+ at the lowest end) with a very restrictive user #
> > license. The Dart can only legally (and probably software limited)
> > support 10 simultaneous users. That's how he can sell an ICS box for
> > ~$700 (I don't know how he can afford to _support_ a box that cheap,
> > I'll have to ask him next time I talk to him).
> >
> > However, with that license issue, the usefulness of being able to serve
> > 120 reqs/sec is highly suspect. Therefore, Alex and Duane (and I
>
> They really should explain this reasoning in a footnote, it is reasonable to say that 120 req/s is
> irrelevant to 10 users but they need to say it

Hmmm... Isn't it discussed in detail in the controversies section? If
not, then it was removed since I looked at the prelim report.
Yep...right here:

http://www.measurement-factory.com/results/public/cacheoff/N03/report.by-meas.html#Sec:Controversy

I'm sure that link will get clipped by email clients. But it's near the
bottom of the report.

> > Nonetheless...Let's all think about what that tells us about our goals
> > for Squid. The Dart with a P200 (not PII, not Celeron..a Pentium MMX)
> > with a single 5400 RPM disk and 128MB of RAM outperformed our box by a
> > very small margin. Our box was a Thunderbird 800, with 3 7200 RPM
> > disks, and 512MB of RAM. We couldn't handle more than 30 reqs/sec on
> > hardware that size. We've got our work cut out for us, eh?
>
> We can do it, we just need to stop trying to do 3 month fixes and do the complete rewrite from end
> to end.

I'll test what you give me. ;-) I don't have any doubt that the
programmers that we've been working with can match anything that's out
there. I think we even have a sort of roadmap to get there from here.
The signalled I/O path, as well as the /dev/poll path have both been
tread before us, we just need to follow their footsteps (and make up the
parts that haven't been tread as we go along). We know (sort of) what
it takes to make a web cache filesystem sing, and a couple of great FS
programmers to do it. Finally, we've got some time. 8-9 months between
now and cacheoff 4, which is when Squid's proponents and detractors
alike will be expecting to see something.
                                  --
                     Joe Cooper <joe@swelltech.com>
                 Affordable Web Caching Proxy Appliances
                        http://www.swelltech.com
Received on Thu Oct 12 2000 - 06:08:02 MDT