squid-fs some very basic info

From: Oskar Pearson <oskar@dont-contact.us>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 01:37:42 +0200


(apologies for mailing all sorts of seperate messages - they are all the
mail that has been sitting on my laptop ready to send for days and days

Hi all

Compared to the pretty technical thread that has been going on recently
this is a pretty pitiful note, but it may be worth putting in the Squid
Releas notes/FAQ sometime in the future. It may also be clueless :)

I was reading linux-kernel the other day and saw a problem where someone
had changed the block size, and could no longer make very large files on that
device. The problem is that there are a maximum number of indirection
blocks in the fs code, and since his block size was small it meant that he
needed lots of indirect blocks to maintain a file of that length.

I just realized that the number of 'indirect' block pointers could be reduced on
Linux's ext2 filesystem by specifying a larger block size, and this has an
if the squid-fs stuff seems worthwhile.

If we have a really large file (on a filesystem, not on an actual /dev
entry...) a very large block size would reduce the number of indirect
blocks that we need. People should re-format their cache store filesystem
to have a very large block size.

I don't know if putting Squid-FS on a /dev/ entry is such a good idea. I
believe that we changed our Sybase (Solaris) setup to store the database on
a raw device. We found that the IO rate according to iostat dropped
dramatically (at least for certain types of accesses...).
Once Squid-FS is happy and running I would be interested to see if that is
the case.



"Haven't slept at all. I don't see why people insist on sleeping. You feel
so much better if you don't. And how can anyone want to lose a minute -
a single minute of being alive?"				-- Think Twice
Received on Tue Jul 29 2003 - 13:15:53 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:11:55 MST