Thank you Joe for the comments and recommendations... I'll keep them handy. :)
--- Bill Arlofski Unix/Novell Systems Administrator The Hotchkiss School waa@hotchkiss.org 860-435-3140 >>> Joe Cooper <joe@swelltech.com> 11/5/2001 4:35:21 PM >>> Bill Arlofski wrote: > Processor Speed? Any modern processor will do. We ship a Celeron 733 in our smallest model to support up to 2 T1 links and have cycles to spare. > Memory Size? Anything over 192MB should be fine...but it will also depend on the sise of your cache. > Should we bother considering mulit-link trunking (bonding) two 100Mbps ethernet connections to the switch, or is that just plain silly? No. That would be silly. > Also, regarding the cache volume: > What is a reasonable size? 12GB is probably plenty for a single T1. > RAID 1, or RAID 5? Seems like RAID 1 is the way to go for speed. Or maybe a RAID 1+0 for speed and redundancy. > Can I get away with software-based RAID, or should we not play games and go for a hardware raid solution? Don't use RAID at all for cache partitions. It would be silly and counter-productive. There are ways to minimize the damage to performance done by using RAIDed partitions, but it's cheaper and more effective just to avoid it. > Did I miss anything? You aren't going to hit any performance problems, most likely...You probably won't even hit the file descriptor limits of Linux (it defaults to 1024--which is usually plenty for 1.5Mbits, but I raise them to 8192 on all of our boxes anyway). I do recommend using an AUFS compile of Squid. And ReiserFS for the filesystem is good too. But even those two things probably aren't needed in your case. Any modern hardware with a standard Squid install can probably handle it. -- Joe Cooper <joe@swelltech.com> http://www.swelltech.com Web Caching Appliances and SupportReceived on Tue Nov 06 2001 - 09:22:02 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 17:03:55 MST