Re: [squid-users] Squid Question

Brian,
        What do you think it would take (hardware wise?) to support squid
transparently logging 100Mbit worth of traffic? The OS can handle up to a
few hundred megabits without a problem, but of course that is diffrent..

We have about 3 log files per site and cant combine them because of the
way the analyzers work. So with a few thousand sites that adds up. I do
have other solutions besides the squid route. However, the squid idea
would really keep things centralized and clean. Any ideas are greatly
appreciated.

Thanks,

Sagi Brody

On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Brian wrote:

> Squid runs as a single process, so it won't use that second processor
> unless you run two of them. Our Celeron 366 systems do 10Mbit without a
> problem -- 15 with some prodding. Therefore, my guess would be no.
>
> If you have enough disk space on each end, I would suggest running an
> rsync server on the stats server and have the web servers upload their
> logs during a slow period.
>
> As for cutting FDs, add vhost to the log format and log all of the sites
> together. You would lose per-site log files moving to squid, anyway.
>
> -- Brian
>
> On Saturday 03 November 2001 04:05 am, Sagi Brody wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I'm looking to use squid to ease the logging on my web servers.
> > However, I've never used squid before and would like know if this is
> > possible and how much of a load it will present. Currently, I'm NFS
> > mounting all my webservers to a stats server which parses the log files.
> > Because NFS connections are not as stable as I'd like them to be, I'm
> > looking to put a transparent machine running Squid infront of the
> > webserver, and have it do all the logging locally. This would reduce the
> > nfs connections being made and create less room for error. It would also
> > save me 2 or 3 FDs per site on the servers which also seems apealing.
> >
> > My question is what sort of memory and CPU load would squid present upon
> > this transparent server? I'm thinking of using a dual p3 800 with a 1GB
> > of ram and a few scsi HDs. Would this be enough to handle the logging of
> > say 100Mbps of traffic? I'm NOT looking to do any caching at all. Any
> > help is greatly appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Sagi Brody
>
Received on Sun Nov 04 2001 - 22:09:41 MST