Re: [squid-users] 2.4.20-aa and LARGE Squid process -> SIGSEGV

From: Ralf Hildebrandt <Ralf.Hildebrandt@dont-contact.us>
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 13:10:01 +0100

* MASOOD AHMAD <masoodnt10@yahoo.com>:

> Decrease your mem_cache size to 32 MB or 64MB it will
> work fine for you

700 MB also works fine for us. 64MB is definitely too low (see below).

> cache_mem mean does'nt that squid will only use the
> memory which you mentioned here. try to study squid
> faqs

We did - it seems you didn't. We followed the rule-of-thumb from
http://www.squid-cache.org/Doc/FAQ/FAQ-8.html#ss8.11!

2 * 17 GB cache disk == 34 GB.
approximately 10 MB of RAM per GB diskspace -> 340 MB RAM
plus the cache_mem setting (700 MB) and about an additional 10-20MB
sums up to: 340 + 700 + 20 = 1060 MB (about 1 GB).

Means we have about 1 GB extra RAM as recommended by the FAQ.

Maybe the real question is: Does it make sense to use cache_mem = 700
MB at all?

-- 
Ralf Hildebrandt (Im Auftrag des Referat V a)   Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de
Charite Campus Mitte                            Tel.  +49 (0)30-450 570-155
Referat V a - Kommunikationsnetze -             Fax.  +49 (0)30-450 570-916
So whenever someone says: "it works with Sendmail, so it must be
a Postfix bug" my initial reaction is "yeah, right".
Received on Sat Dec 21 2002 - 05:10:04 MST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 17:12:10 MST