Re: [squid-users] 2.6-stable3 performance weirdness with polymix-4 testing

On Mon, Aug 28, 2006, Pranav Desai wrote:

> for (a), shouldnt the disk queue also affect the performance during
> the first phase of the test. The first phase is almost perfect with no
> degradation in times.
> If I may send you the graphs, in which it seems very wrong that the
> degradation happens so suddenly.
> Maybe I will try a few test with a longer first phase to see if the
> disk queue catches up and degrades the performance.

I'm pretty sure the first phase is "fill" and not "read".

> I will be trying COSS shortly. Even I am expecting it to do much
> better. What other kind of work do you have in mind. Another
> filesystem or something ?

Yes, another filestore. And a bunch of squid storage manager changes to boot.

> I am thinking of giving this http://logfs.sourceforge.net/ a try.
> But I dont know if it needs changes in squid to make efficient use of
> the filesystem.

There's lots which could be done to improve Squid's use of traditional
file stores. In fact, there's bunches of papers written from circa 8 years
ago when academics were really interested in this stuff. A few of them
twiddled with the Squid store code and made things faster but didn't
contribute any patches back. The only person who did contribute major
store code changes (Eric Stern) contributed his COSS code which we've
only made stable (and useable under modern loads) very recently.

So yes. There's plenty of room to grow. I'm kind of hoping someone else
will pop up out of the woodwork and help us work on this.

Please :)

Adrian
Received on Mon Aug 28 2006 - 20:39:57 MDT