RE: [squid-users] Impressions of 3.2.1

Greetings,

For migrating to 3.1 to 3.2 did you have to reinitialize the squid dir.

Had tried to move from 3.1 to 3.2 a couple of times but was unsuccessful.
There were frequent "FATAL: Received Segment Violation...dying." messages .

Rgds,
Sunil

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Beschorner [mailto:daniel.beschorner_at_evlks.de]
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 3:55 PM
To: squid-users_at_squid-cache.org
Subject: [squid-users] Impressions of 3.2.1

Congratulations on the 3.2 release!
It seems quite stable in our >1000 client environment, good work!

Some first impressions after using it for some days (Linux x64, no disk
cache, SMP mode with 2 workers):

On an old server (SLES 10) the load sharing between workers (2 or 4) is
pretty bad, in fact only one worker seems to do all the work. On a SLES 11
system load sharing is a lot more fair. But as you stated is this OS
related, not a direct Squid issue.

The shared memory cache is harder to follow in its memory use than in 3.1,
am I right that the "cached" value of the "free" output is somehow related
due to shared mem?

And some kind of little bug maybe related to SMP: If I rotate the logs (1x
access.log and 1x cache.log) they spread both to log.0/.1/.2 and suddently
access.log.0/access.log.1 and cache.log/cache.log.0 are used in parallel.

However, 3.2 with SMP seems to be a really nice scalability feature.

Thank you!
Daniel
Received on Fri Sep 07 2012 - 06:41:22 MDT