Re: [squid-users] Squid requirements

>
>> --- On Wed, 7/16/08, Adrian Chadd <adrian_at_freebsd.org> wrote:
>>
>>> From: Adrian Chadd <adrian_at_freebsd.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [squid-users] Squid requirements
>>> To: "Chris Robertson" <crobertson_at_gci.net>
>>> Cc: "Squid Users" <squid-users_at_squid-cache.org>
>>> Date: Wednesday, July 16, 2008, 9:28 AM
>>> What we're really missing is a bunch of "hardware
>>> x, config y, testing
>>> z, results a, b, c." TMF used to have some stuff up
>>> for older hardware
>>> but there's just nothing recent to use as a measuring
>>> stick..
>>>
>>
>> The problem is that there's so much disparate technology out there.
>> multi-core cpus, all kinds of different memory, all kinds of different
>> disk
>> technologies, different filesystems, different OS, different kernels,
>> and on and
>> on. It's hard to get useful measuring sticks.
>>
>
> shoot me, but as ever faster is more expensive, so if you can't afford a
> Lamborghini but like what it does then buy something else what comes close
> and fits
> your budget, hammer-speed and cheap does not exist, reasonable speed at
> reasonable
> cost does exist, hammer-speed at low-cost does not exist unless you jump
> the cliff
> what might result in sudden-death ... that is free and is fufufast
> (sudden=>now)
>
>> I still think it's a useful pursuit. But I think that the reasons above
>> make
>> people less inclined to do it.ree and
>
>
> to do what? caching? or proxying? or nothing?
> while(my_input=0); (do='nothing');
>
>>
>> spec.org tries to level the field, if someone concocted a level field
>> and made it
>> easy for people to do, then we'd see more results.
>>
>
> problem is most people look for easy=>lazy and lazy=>cheap but
> unfortunatly that
> equation does not work either

Wrong. It works. Just not very fast. :-)

I've had squid running on a 800MHz machine with 10GB HDD. 25% savings on
the web bandwidth costs paid for the upgrade machine in short order. Now
the savings are even better.

>
> as also do not exist any valuable hardware comparism since you need to do
> it
> yourself, means you need to look (clients, uplink, machine,
> bandwidth_for_each,
> disired_performance, budget) and finally look at your cache and at the end
> it is
> what_you_get_is_what_you_get_(for_your_money) ... so my friend, at the end
> it does
> not matter what they say to buy what you _CAN_ buy and get lucky with it
> :)

The measure of interest to an admin spec'ing up a Squid box are IMO:
 - highest req/sec vs cost.
H/W config provides the cost scale.
But whats missing is: what req/sec matches what H/W config for Squid?

Amos
Received on Thu Jul 17 2008 - 04:17:34 MDT