Re: [squid-users] Optimal cache_dir L2 value for ReiserFS?

Not in my experience (and I don't think anyone has done more benchmarks
of ReiserFS and Squid than I).

256 actually looked like a pretty good value in my tests. 1024 was too
many, and exhibited locking problems in ReiserFS, at least in the 2.2
series of kernels. And I didn't find any measurable difference between
254 and 256. But then again, I didn't find a really statistically
significant difference between 254 and 256 on ext2 either. Go figure.

Linux 2.4 may change some of these truisms...I won't know until I
experiment more with it. (And before anyone asks...No, kernel 2.4 is
not faster than 2.2 for Squid.)

Steve Snyder wrote:

> I was advised some time ago that for the Linux ext2 file system a
> cache_dir value of L2=254 was more efficient than that of L2=256. Is
> there a similar performance consideration for the ReiserFS file system?
>
> If it matters, this a SMP Linux v2.4.x system running Squid 2.4STABLE1
> with aufs file access.
>
> Thank you.

                                   --
                      Joe Cooper <joe@swelltech.com>
                  Affordable Web Caching Proxy Appliances
                         http://www.swelltech.com
Received on Wed May 23 2001 - 10:06:20 MDT