Re: Performance tuning

On Mon, 22 Nov 1999 22:02:54 +0100, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:

>Jens-S. Voeckler wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 21 Nov 1999, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
>>
>> ]> - number of L1 and L2 directories for on-disk cache?
>> ]
>> ]L2 = 256
>> ]L1 at least cache_dir_size * 2 / store_avg_object_size / L2 / L2 + 1
>>
>> Could you please set a few parenthesis for people like me?
>
>Normal rules apply. Calculated straight left to right.
>
>> cache_dir_size * 2 := 134217728 [Byte]
>> store_avg_object_size := 13312 [Byte]
>> L2 := 256
>>
>> L1 = 1.1538 ???
>
>Yes, or actually 1 since only integers are allowed. The +1 is to guard
>the calculation from any rouning/truncation error (will be enought
>irregardless if the result is rounded or truncated).
>
>Put another way:
>
>Squid will use one L1 directory for each 416 MB of cache_dir space with
>the default store_avg_object_size setting of 13 KB. More L1 directories
>will only waste inodes, less will create an inbalance in how the L1
>directories are populated by Squid.

Are the defaults (Squid v2.2S5) really that wrong?

At (cachesize=100MB, L1=16, L2=256), the default values are *way*
different than the above equation would suggest are correct.

*** Steve Snyder ***
Received on Mon Nov 22 1999 - 22:08:28 MST