Re: comparison of the NOVM version

> >>> "Andres Kroonmaa" wrote
> > FD usage is quite similar for both versions with only NOVM/MISS
> > having 50% more FD's in use, while memory use differs by several times.
>
> And this is the critical difference for us. Our caches are creeping
> ever-closer to the 4096 FD limit of Solaris as their load increases -
> we can always just add more memory to the box (well, we can add enough
> that it's not going to be a problem), but extending the number of FDs
> doesn't seem to be possible (2.6 doesnt seem to help :-(

    I see, pure you ;) But isn't it better to setup several caches with
 round-robin dns? You are reaching your FD limits anyway... This 50%
 will not save you forever.

> > One thing is _average_ which is nice and useful thing for decisions,
> > but the other thing is _peak_ usage, and thats what NOVM deals better with.
>
> It depends on what your limiting factor is. If it's memory, the system goes
> slower. If it's filedescriptors, it just stops.

    Wait a minute... It doesn't stop, it just doesn't accept any further
 connections until some of the sessions are completed and FD's are released.
 Those that are connected get their stuff as fast as network can not as
 slowly as paging squid can do. Its not a matter of slow/stop, its a matter
 of fast/later...

-------------------------------------------------------------------
 Andres Kroonmaa Telefon: 6308 909
 Network administrator
 E-mail: andre@ml.ee Phone: (+372) 6308 909
 Organization: MicroLink Online
 EE0001, Estonia, Tallinn, Sakala 19 Fax: (+372) 6308 901
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tue Jul 29 2003 - 13:15:41 MDT