Re: [squid-users] Http Req/sec Once more

You Got it steve
i m sticking with 2.2.19 coz of the problems that ppl have had to face with
2.4.x
but i m not too entirely happy with my 2.2.19
keep on getting out of memory errors under traffic at times
do i need to reserve more memory for the kernel .. how do i do that
btw are the start up scripts tuning okay
waiting for a reply
Khiz
--- Steve Snyder <swsnyder@home.com> wrote:
> Given that you're running a SMP system, you'd probably get improved
> performance by moving to a v2.4 kernel. A lot of the kernel processing,
> like network traffic, was serialized in v2.2.x.
>
> Are staying with the older kernel because of reliability concerns? I
> know that the v2.4 kernels got off to a rocky start, but I've found
> v2.4.17 to be very stable in the 6 weeks since it was released.
>
>
> On Wednesday 06 February 2002 11:36 pm, khiz code wrote:
> > Hello Joe
> > Gosh . u still remember me .. guess ppl dont kinda tend to forget pests
> > so very soon ;-)
> >
> > i Have a compaq proliant 5500 series
> > dual P11 Xeon 550 Mhz
> > 512 megs Ram
> > 5 SCSI Ultra -2 10000 rpm disks of 9 GB each .. the cache dirs are
> > spread over 4 disks as 3GB slices for a total cache size of 12 GB ..
> > each on a seperate reiserfs partition
> > compaq Netelligent 10/100 mbps nics
> > this is redhat 6.2 with 2.2.19 kernel compiled with ip_wccp as a
> > module.. picked up the patch from ur site
> > FD_SETSIZE is 16384
> > my start up scripts
> > echo 1 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
> > echo 16384>/proc/sys/fs/file-max
> > echo 32768 >/proc/sys/fs/inode-max
> > echo 8192 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_max_syn_backlog
> > echo 1024 65000 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_local_port_range
> > echo 30 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_fin_timeout
> > echo 300 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_keepalive_time
> > echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_sack
> > echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_timestamps
> > echo 5>/proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syn_retries
> > echo 10 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/route/gc_interval
> > echo 2>/proc/sys/net/ipv4/route/gc_min_interval # used these for
> > avoiding the dst cache overflow msgs that i used to get
> > echo 30 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/route/gc_timeout
> >
> > echo "60 1000 128 256 500 3000 500 1884 2" >/proc/sys/vm/bdflush
> > echo "256 512 1024" >/proc/sys/vm/freepages
> >
> > Yes i have read all the docs on your website
> >
> > Do i need to furnish some more info
> > awaiting responses ..
> >
> > TIA
> > Khiz
> >
> > --- Joe Cooper <joe@swelltech.com> wrote:
> > > khiz code wrote:
> > > > Hi all and joe especially
> > > >
> > > > joe, i remember u giving me approximate statistics abt the capacity
> > > > in
> > >
> > > terms of
> > >
> > > > req/sec for a T1 line
> > > > in myscenario i am connected to my upstream via a E1 (2.048 Mbps)
> > > > my clients connect to me via leasedlines
> > > > i have oversold my E1 capacity ( like all good ISPs ;-) abt 2
> > > > times to
> > >
> > > abt 5
> > >
> > > > Mb/s
> > > > so will the statistics change in terms of req/sec that the cache
> > > > will
> > >
> > > receive
> > >
> > > > sorry for being so dumb. once more ...
> > > > one more thing
> > > > commercial boxes like cisco, netcache etc give statisctics in
> > > > terms of connections/sec that the box can handle
> > > >
> > > > my linux box has time-wait period of 60s
> > > > tcp_max_syn_backlog = 8192
> > > > local_port_range 1025 64000
> > > >
> > > > how can i calculate the number of simultaneous connections that
> > > > this squid
> > >
> > > box
> > >
> > > > can sustain for web traffic ..assuming that only squid runs on the
> > > > box
> > >
> > > Hehehe... How long is a piece of string, Khiz?
> > >
> > > You haven't told us anything about your box. Here is what I sell for
> > > one or two T1 links these days:
> > >
> > > 800MHz Celeron (can't get a 633 anymore, which also would be plenty
> > > of power)
> > > 256MB RAM
> > > 1 x 7200 RPM 30GB disk
> > >
> > > These boxes will sustain about 60-70 reqs/sec of real traffic without
> > > sweating. Short (30 minute) bursts of loads of over 100 reqs/sec are
> > > probably possible.
> > >
> > > However, a client population suitable for a single T1 will never
> > > generate that high of a sustained load. Our single T1 ISP clients
> > > are seeing about 35 reqs/sec or less at their peak periods and their
> > > caches aren't working very hard even when doing extra stuff like
> > > running redirectors or acting as ICP peers (even our old 850 boxes
> > > which were only 450MHz K6-2 with 192MB RAM). You can't make your
> > > users browse only cache hits, so the speed of your cache isn't really
> > > your upper bound if you have a T1.
> > >
> > > Have you read my caching deployment guide at the Swell Technology
> > > site? It has some information about all of this stuff. I've also
> > > specified all of our machines based on reqs/sec and bandwidth they
> > > will handle--that ought to give you some rough ideas about what Squid
> > > can do on given hardware if well tuned. (Some of this information is
> > > going away soon, or being altered significantly, when our new website
> > > goes up March 1st or thereabouts. So more up to date information and
> > > a lot more of it will be on the site, but probably less specific for
> > > the kind of info you are looking for--so enjoy it while it is
> > > available.) --
> > > Joe Cooper <joe@swelltech.com>
> > > http://www.swelltech.com
> > > Web Caching Appliances and Support
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
> > http://greetings.yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
Received on Sat Feb 09 2002 - 03:54:29 MST