RE: [squid-users] comparing squid with IIS 4.0

yeah
no dout abt that
but i was wondering that squid is very extensively used for front ending
webservers when used in a reverse proxy environment
so my understanding was that the client serving capability of squid would be
more than that of a normal webserver ..and definitely more than IIS :-)

i was actually planning to switch between my IIS and squid using cisco CSS
11151 for dynamic (.asp) and static content respectively
but if the web serving (request handling) capability of IIS is inherently more
than that of squid ..or in plain words IIS is more powerful than squid then it
would not make much sense to pass all the static requests to squid .. squid
would simply get overwhelmed isnt it ( i m not planning to have a cache
cluster)
waiting for comments
Khiz

--- Robert Collins <robert.collins@itdomain.com.au> wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: khiz code [mailto:khizcode@yahoo.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 11:56 PM
> > To: squid-users@squid-cache.org
> > Subject: [squid-users] comparing squid with IIS 4.0
> >
> >
> > hi al
> > folks at my place hv just conducted a Microsoft web stress
> > test on an IIS 4.0 unoptimised server for 5 mins. THis is
> > machien with dual p 111 xeon 512 megs RAm
> > the amount of req/sec reported was abt 598.3
> > is this possible
> > the best squid can go upto max 300/sec with proper tuning
> >
> > doesn't squid compare well to nowmal webservers for
> > webserving .. i ve always been under the impression that
> > squid would just blow away any webserver
> > am i missing something
>
> Yes. Squid is not a webserver. It's a web cache. They are very different
> things in some respects. If you want to compare webservers, try Tux.
>
> Rob

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
http://sports.yahoo.com/
Received on Wed Mar 20 2002 - 06:29:02 MST