Re: [squid-users] Did 2.4.STABLE1 have some serious problems?

While my only testing of 2.4STABLE1 was actually of a daily snapshot
from a couple weeks after STABLE1 (which had a couple of fixes), I
didn't run into any problems like those you describe.

But, given the number of fixes since STABLE1 (FTP crasher, and
swap.state bug, in particular) I'd recommend eveyone upgrade anyway.

STABLE3 seems very solid so far, for me and the boxes we've deployed
with it.

BAARDA, Don wrote:

> G'day,
>
> just curious, but I had some serious problems with long delays and empty
> responses using 2.4.STABLE1. The loadavg was spiking up above 1.0 about
> every 1.5hrs, and was generally high.
>
> After upgrading to 2.4.STABLE3 the problems seem to have gone away, and the
> loadavg is staying below 0.1 all the time.
>
> I've had a look at the changelog, and although there have been a few fixes
> that might have affected this, I can't really see what might have
> caused/fixed it. Does anyone know about it?
>
> In any case, I would recommend anyone running 2.4.STABLE1 should upgrade.
>
> ABO

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