Re: [squid-users] Current Performance?

Dennis wrote:

> At 07:12 PM 12/05/2001, you wrote:
>
>> Using a TCP proxy has the drawback that the users IP addresses will be
>> hidden from the real proxy. All will appear as if coming from the server
>> running the TCP proxy.
>>
>> Another alternative is to use a "TCP loadbalancer / L4 switch", such as
>> Linux Virtual Server <http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org>. LVS also have
>> the neat feature that the load balancer can be clustered among your farm
>> members, eleminating the need of a separate load balancing component...
>
>
> Wouldnt standard balancing cause the same popular pages to be stored on
> all of your caches?
>
> It seems that proxying based on the destination web server address would
> cause, say, all of the requests for cnn.com to be in the same cache..and
> would be a much more efficient use of resources.

Just FYI: LVS has two cache-specific balancing algorithms. One is
destination hash based (like WCCP), the other is memory-persistent with
least load weighting. I prefer the destination hash selection algorithm.

-- 
Joe Cooper <joe@swelltech.com>
http://www.swelltech.com
Web Caching Appliances and Support