Re: Follow up on Benchmarking results for 3.1.10 vs 2.7.9

On 07/01/11 05:44, Jack Quinlin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have some benchmarking numbers that I would like to share with the community.
> These numbers are from 2 servers that have the exact same hardware configuration
> in the same data center receiving the same type of requests (not the best setup
> for a SQUID server but that is a different story).
>
> The server spec is below follwed by the benchmark numbers. I am looking to
> improving the 3.1.10 config or adjust RHEL4 in efforts to reduce the CPU
> consumption and improve hits. I will follow up with any improvements or findings
> that find interesting.
>
> Server Spec:
>
> CPU: Dual Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU L5310 @ 1.60GHz Quad Core
> Mem: 4GB
> HD: 450 SATA
> OS: Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS release 4 (Nahant Update 4) 32-bit, OS has been
>
> tuned for 32-bit& RHEL 4.4
>
> Squid Object Cache: Version 3.1.10-20101227
> Users: 57
> RPS: 1409
> Hit Ratio Request: 36.3%, 36.4% , Byte: 47.6%, 48.6%
> CPU Usage: 51.63%
>
>
> Squid Object Cache: Version 2.7.STABLE9-20100923
> Users: 55
> RPS: 1419
> Hit Ratio Request: 44.6%, 44.9% , Byte: 47.7%, 48.5%
> CPU Usage: 33.42%
>
>
> All comments and questions welcomed.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jack
>

Wonderful. Thank you very much for this Jack.

This ticks off one more checkbox on the 2.7 obsoletion requirements (3.x
achieving RPS parity with 2.7).

Now we are just waiting for feature parity to prevent upgrade problems.

Amos

-- 
Please be using
   Current Stable Squid 2.7.STABLE9 or 3.1.10
   Beta testers wanted for 3.2.0.4