Re: Hot object cache

On Monday 21 October 2002 06.54, Robert Collins wrote:

> > I've given this a lot of thought, and the only solution I'm happy
> > with is:
> >
> > * the squid store layer has no idea of ranges, swapping in and
> > out * the store layers themselves make the decision
> > * when the store layers handle the index, they can make the
> > decision whether an object reply is cacheable (as hno mentioned),
> > and i .. * prefer that the object reply isn't marked as cacheable
> > until we've cached it - we can fix this later for (fat files,
> > streams, etc.) .. this may sound like the cheap and easy way out,
> > but any other assumptions limit what we're able to do.
>
> AFAICT this agrees with what I am proposing.

You still do not seem to agree on the last item..

> > Is it possible to complete the fix_ranges code without playing
> > with the swapin/out logic?
>
> No.

So what do you need to change of the swapin/out logics to complete
fix_ranges, and which impacts do this have on the FS layer API?

Regards
Henrik
Received on Mon Oct 21 2002 - 03:09:26 MDT