Re: 2.3s3 memory leak?

You are right, the number of objects can vary radically. Imagine somebody
going to a page and pulling up a couple of hundred 1k thumbnail images.
Each one of those is an object that has memory assigned to track it. Take a
look at the number of objects that the directory store is holding, it will
be more definitive. The rough calculation is 13k per object... but 13 x 1k
objects can fit in the same space and have 13 times the amount of over head.

Squid 2.3 Stable 3 has the option for limiting the minimum object size.
Might be worth looking into.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Simon Fawcett" <simon.fawcett@smart.uk.com>
To: "'Wayne Smith'" <wcsmith@myrealbox.com>; <squid-users@ircache.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2000 9:27 AM
Subject: RE: 2.3s3 memory leak?

> Hi Wayne
>
> Thanks for coming back to me so fast, here are the additional details,
does
> it add up?
>
> cache_dir ufs /var/spool/squid 100 16 256
> This is 100MB but I guess the number of objects varies massively, perhaps
if
> I used 20 16 256 I might be better and cache mem is only 4 MB
>
> Simon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wayne Smith [mailto:wcsmith@myrealbox.com]
> Sent: 13 July 2000 11:59
> To: squid-users@ircache.net
> Subject: Re: 2.3s3 memory leak?
>
>
> Simon
>
> You didn't saw how large your cache_dir was. Squid uses 100+ bytes per
> object that it's tracking. Number of users isn't as important as number
of
> objects when it comes to memory useage. Take a look at the number of
> objects in your cache. IIRC, the normal formula is 10 megs of memory for
> every gig of hard drive space. So if you definied a 4 gig cache_dir,
you'd
> want at least 40 megs just for squid tracking the objects, plus memory for
> squid cache_mem (for hot and intransit objects), plus memory for the OS
and
> filecaching.
>
> You probably either need more memory, or a smaller cache_dir.
>
> HTH
>
> Wayne
Received on Thu Jul 13 2000 - 10:37:13 MDT