Re: [squid-users] Moving to squid from inktomi

You probably should add one or two more drives for the cache, unless
the amount of content you are caching allows most of the traffic to
fit in memory..

On Thursday 27 June 2002 20.28, Marshall wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am currently using Inktomi Traffic Server for reverse proxy. I
> need to add more cache servers, but the Intomi software license is
> a whopping $4500 for a single processor. Beside the fact, the
> "appliance" it is running on is going to hell since they have 4
> disks in RAID 5 using the Linux kernel. I am not a Linux user and
> don't want to babysit software raid anyways.-
> Back to the point, I am looking for a cheaper solution while trying
> to add redundancy. My overall goal is to hit 600 req/sec. using a
> minimum of two machines. My hardware budget is $7000. (The
> Inktomi appliance is supposedly capable of 600 req/sec in reverse
> proxy mode.)- So far, I am on this track for each server's
> hardware: Single 1.13Ghz PIII, 1GB RAM, 2x18GB 10K Ultra 160 HDs (1
> for OS/logs, 1 for cache). I can get 2 1650s with this config from
> Dell for ~$4,300 which is well under budget which is good. I am
> leaning towards FreeBSD. Based on old IRC cache-off benckmarks
> (using hardcore guestimating), it 'seems' that each server could
> handle over 300 req/sec if configured properly.- These will be
> caching primarily images (70% of which are over 40K). Considering
> my low requirements for cache storage space and that I will be
> using squid in reverse mode does 600 req/sec seem feasible with the
> above scenario? If not, can hardware upgrades get me there (15K
> drives, dual proc, more RAM, etc)?
> Any input would be appreciated.
>
> -Marshall
Received on Thu Jun 27 2002 - 18:09:56 MDT