Duane Wessels wrote:
>Here's the condensed version:
> Squid 2.2.STABLE5 on Linux with async I/O
> 50 req/sec
> 55% hit ratio
> 1.52 sec mean response time
A tad bit high mean response times, I think.
How does that compare with these real-life results?
To wit:
[ Note: The byte hit ratios are a bit off now, at peak usage, they're
about 30%-35%.
I know median-service-time is not the same as mean-service-time,
but the minimum service time for a hit, is around 0.053s,
comparing this with the dcomm-1 results, I see Cobalt specify
a mere 1.98s; what did your test come up with?
And why is it so much higher?
-- SRB
]
Squid Object Cache: Version 2.2.STABLE4BuGless
Start Time:
Sun, 29 Aug 1999 03:35:14 GMT
Current Time:
Fri, 15 Oct 1999 08:46:53 GMT
Connection information for squid:
Number of clients accessing cache: 0
Number of HTTP requests received: 31064930
Number of ICP messages received: 0
Number of ICP messages sent: 0
Number of queued ICP replies: 0
Request failure ratio: 0.00%
HTTP requests per minute: 456.9
ICP messages per minute: 0.0
Select loop called: 340705800 times, 11.974 ms avg
Cache information for squid:
Request Hit Ratios: 5min: 52.3%, 60min: 50.4%
Byte Hit Ratios: 5min: 7.0%, 60min: 22.1%
Storage Swap size: 18585514 KB
Storage Mem size: 16388 KB
Mean Object Size: 10.48 KB
Requests given to unlinkd: 7208974
Median Service Times (seconds) 5 min 60 min:
HTTP Requests (All): 0.18699 0.19742
Cache Misses: 0.42149 0.46965
Cache Hits: 0.05046 0.05331
Near Hits: 0.20843 0.35832
Not-Modified Replies: 0.02592 0.02899
DNS Lookups: 0.05313 0.03223
ICP Queries: 0.00000 0.00000
--
Sincerely, srb@cuci.nl
Stephen R. van den Berg (AKA BuGless).
"I have a *cunning* plan!"
Received on Fri Oct 15 1999 - 03:25:33 MDT
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:48:55 MST