Re: [squid-users] coss vs aufs vs diskd

Hi Monah,

Monah Baki wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am trying to deploy a cache server in a environment for kids (approx
> 2000). Currently my cache (squid-2.6-stable17) is configured to use
> diskd, but since it's in a test environment I did not reach the limit
> where I read under high load it will crash. Coss since it's
> experimental, yet some users have given it good remarks as far as
> performance and stability.
> So should I stick with diskd or switch to coss?

What is your hardware setup? I am guessing it will be a P4 machine with
1 or 2 GB of memory with a couple of hard drives.

 From my experience, if your server is running FreeBSD and the average
requests are under 50 req/sec, then DISKD is the best choice. However if
your req/sec should go above 50-60, then I would suggest AUFS.

If your squid proxy will be running on a Linux box, then I would suggest
AUFS.

COSS is working great for me on my FreeBSD squid boxes. It seems
specially good for caching small objects. The only drawback of COSS is
it's long rebuilding process.

The best option would be to use two (2) storage schemes.

(1.) DISKD + COSS for FreeBSD
(2.) AUFS + COSS for Linux

Note: This are just my suggestions!

Hope that helps.

Thanking you...

>
> Thanks
>
>
> BSD Networking, Microsoft Notworking
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
With best regards and good wishes,
Yours sincerely,
Tek Bahadur Limbu
System Administrator
(TAG/TDG Group)
Jwl Systems Department
Worldlink Communications Pvt. Ltd.
Jawalakhel, Nepal
http://www.wlink.com.np
http://teklimbu.wordpress.com