Re: [squid-users] Re: Effort for port 3.1 to windows?

On 26/04/2011 14:07, sichent wrote:

>
>> Well, thanks for the pointer, But as far as I can see there, it's a
>> installer, how did you generate the binary?
>
> Well we got the binaries from Acme Consulting (link from squid web site)
> they seem to have quite thorough instructions on how to built the
> sources....
>
>>
>> I'm surprised no one has been taking on squid on windows seriously (or
>> I didn't find it), but by far, most proxy software I tried on windows
>> have different problem, while squid is the best atm I think.
>
> the idea with windows (at least it works for me) is to have a small vm
> with linux + squid instance running
> (256Mb+) on windows that serves all possible needs :) ... so i can
> live without windows port of squid quite happily.
>
> If you are interested here is howto that I use to set up the squid in
> vm box
>
> http://sichent.wordpress.com/2011/03/31/tiny-web-proxy-and-content-filtering-appliance-version-1-2/
>
>
> best regards
> sich
>
>
Well sichent it's very nice and many SYSADMIN can do that almost without
the need of this guide.
the main problem with a proxy server is the RealTime of it and a VM as
proxy can work in almost RT response time and in many case will be enough.
but it's not a solution for a RT server on an ISP class or ENTERPRISE CLASS.
yes you can manage to have a VM and a SAN or NAS that can give you
really good performence that can be compared to a RT proxy machine.

many users already have a running windows machine and installing VM on
them will mean risking the machine functions response time and other
complicating some system issues.

and also i must say that if a linux program can make it to the windows
world it means a lot for the programmers.

i probably won't use the windows Binaries but it's because i'm well
aware of my linux system environment and capabilities.

Regards
Eliezer
Received on Wed Apr 27 2011 - 06:02:12 MDT