Cacheboy x Lusca_head performance

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Whith cacheboy 1.5 running very stable with 34mbit of link (www traffic),
and on other server (same config and same amount traffic), using
lusca_head.. on lusca server using more memory and doing the SO swapping..

the cacheboy 1.5 server the swap are 0 !!!

i´m using same squid.conf on both servers.. and same amount and type of
hard drives

3 sas 76gb 15k ... two cache_dir on each hd... L1 are 32 and L2 are 256..

server:
dell server
two dual-core xeon
centos 5.2 64 bits
8 gb ram

Original issue reported on code.google.com by ajcor...@gmail.com on 10 Apr 2009 at 4:40

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Ok. Could you first Compare Cacheboy-1.5 to Cacheboy-1.6, then Cacheboy-1.5 to 
Lusca-1.0 ?

I removed the "pools" bit of the memory pools code which may have resulted in 
an increase in RAM use. You can 
also disable the memory pools in the squid.conf file to see how Cacheboy-1.5 
will perform without it.

Original comment by adrian.c...@gmail.com on 10 Apr 2009 at 4:45

[GoogleCodeExporter]

(Don't forget to update the issue!)

Cacheboy-1.6 is fine too. He's now trying Lusca-1.0.

Original comment by adrian.c...@gmail.com on 11 Apr 2009 at 2:10

[GoogleCodeExporter]

fine with cacheboy 1.6 .. next week i will test lusca 1.0 !

regards

Original comment by ajcor...@gmail.com on 11 Apr 2009 at 3:15

[GoogleCodeExporter]

any updates about this?

Original comment by chudy.fernandez on 11 Jul 2009 at 9:59

[GoogleCodeExporter]

the last I heard it was dns related. I'm keeping this ticket open in case aj 
comes
back with anything else.

Original comment by adrian.c...@gmail.com on 13 Jul 2009 at 2:29

[GoogleCodeExporter]

with lastest lusca_head this issue not happen !!

Original comment by ajcor...@gmail.com on 13 Aug 2009 at 6:31

• Added labels: Version-Head
• Removed labels: Version-1.0

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Good! Thanks!

Original comment by adrian.c...@gmail.com on 14 Aug 2009 at 1:49

• Changed state: Done