Re: Multiple storeio types?

Squid works. The ufs disk doesn't.

The ufs store doesn't get written to. It is listed in the storedir
output and there are no errors in the cache.log, but it remains at 0
objects (confirmed by df, etc.).

My max-size directory does come first, and works fine, if I use the aufs
storeio type for it like the real disks--but I hate the thought of using
16 threads to manage 512MB of RAM disk space! ;-)

Andres Kroonmaa wrote:

> hmm, should work. only perhaps ordering is important, max-size FS's
> should be first in sorted order.
> what does mean "doesn't work"?
>
> On 8 Nov 2001, at 3:47, Joe Cooper <joe@swelltech.com> wrote:
>
>
>>I just wanted to check with someone who understands storeio better than
>>I do...
>>
>>Is it expected behavior for only one storeio module to work at any given
>>time? I.e. if I have one directory configured with ufs and one with
>>aufs, should the ufs directory not work?
>>
>>I see nothing in the docs (and nothing in the source that I can figure
>>out) that indicates this is the case, but the actual behavior I'm seeing
>>says it is.
>>
>>Thoughts? (My reason for asking is that I'm fiddling with using a RAM
>>disk for small objects to ease the write burden on the disk a bit using
>>max-size for the RAM cache_dir, but I'd like to not use aufs as it is
>>just needless process and memory overhead since blocking should not be
>>an issue. It works fine with aufs alongside the other dirs, or with ufs
>>when the other directories are disabled.)
>>
>>Thanks! (BTW-Using HEAD from two days ago, if it matters.)
>>--
>>Joe Cooper <joe@swelltech.com>
>>http://www.swelltech.com
>>Web Caching Appliances and Support

-- 
Joe Cooper <joe@swelltech.com>
http://www.swelltech.com
Web Caching Appliances and Support