[squid-users] squid w/ djbdns : ipcache vs dnscache

dear all,

It seems that squid is using an internal dns caching facilities,
that can be configured through ipcache_* parameters.

DJ Bernstein offers a small/fast ( compared to bind) "dnscache" program
that can run a local cache + resolver( on 127.0.0.1)
cf http://cr.yp.to/djbdns.html

I am wondering if pple have experience on the impact on
shrinking ( disable??) the squid built-in ipcache_* to make full use
of dnscache?

in short should we let squid do the proxy business since it is a good
proxy, and let dnscache do the dns business since it is a good dns cache +
resolver!

also, I have a farm of 3 squid servers on a LAN, I guess I might
want to have 3 dnscache configured as cache+forwarder only
to a dnscache+resolver ( well actually the resolver could be
on one of the 3 ). It does make sense not to have each of the 3
dns try to ask the root servers about cnn.com right ?

any comment ?? suggestion ??

since we talk about cache, something else is keeping me from sleeping
at night [;-)]

on my RH7.1 + kern 2.4.10-pre8+reiserfs+ squid 2.4.ST2+diskd + 750MRAM , it
seems that the OS is caching disk access in memory.
I believe that squid is also caching in memory HotObjects
in order to deliver MEM_HIT very quickly...
again, is it really worth to ask squid to deal with this memory
caching instead of relying on the OS, and let squid concentrate
on doing the proxy business??

on one hand i can userstand that specialized code (for ipcache_* or
for mem_hit) can do a BETTER job than generic code (dnscache or OS),
but maintaining the code (ex: offering unicode dns ...) is extra work
for our squid gurus .... and that the gain is maybe not that important:
( gaining 10% on a TCP_HIT -> MEM_HIT is great ... but I'd rather gain
10% on my TCP_MISS with an _even_ better performing squid ...;-) )

have a good day ....

fab
Received on Wed Sep 12 2001 - 01:21:30 MDT