[squid-users] Re: Squid 3.2.6 & hot object cache

>The reason for my question: WOuld a RAM disk help to speed up the proxy?<

I think, this just depends on. Question of statistics. In the past I even
optimized time critical real time systems response time by re-arranging the
distributin of files on disk, to minimize access times, based on access
frequency patterns and correlation of accesses to different files, I
measured before.
Direct response to your question above: YES. Under the assumption, that RAM
disk has the same size as your HDDs you actually use :-)
Practically, however, there will be some serious investment necessary, to
fulfill this assumption, I guess.
So the RAM disk will be only a fraction of the size of your HDDs. Then we
need the statistics. In case you have a high hit rate just for a fraction of
the size of actual HDDs, then the performance advantage should be obvious.
So a simple test would be, to use HDDs just the size of the perspective RAM
disk. Having a high hit byte-hitrate will indicate goof performance gain
when replacing by RAM disk.

On one of my squid2.7 systems I optimized caching for large objects only.
Avg. object size is about 2+MB. Cache files used are almost 2x2TB (2 HDDs),
however, actuall fill rate only 55% wright now. Byte hit rate is about 30+%.
So, replacing this wihth a RAM-disk will not be cheap :-)

For practical use, fast multiple disks, with a clever (read: simple)
filesystem and clever distribution of cache files to allow parallel usage I
consider this "fast enough".

--
View this message in context: http://squid-web-proxy-cache.1019090.n4.nabble.com/Squid-3-2-6-hot-object-cache-tp4658133p4658135.html
Sent from the Squid - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.