Re: In memory objects efficency

flo@mini.gt.owl.de writes:

>Hi,
>as i read the thread of the SS1000 with 310M and 78MB for In Memory Objects
>i was think how effective those in memory caching is. I myself reduced
>this in memory objects very much as i think it only consumes memory.
>
>For understanding. These in memory objects are the Ram equivalent for
>the swap (HD) storage, correct ? It does no caching for writing to disc
>or whatever doesnt it ? So does Squid analyse the hit rate for
>in-memory cache seperately somewhere ?

Hits to in-memory objects still get logged as TCP_HIT, etc.

Negative cached objects are held in memory, never written to disk...

The recent 1.1.beta version has a much better behaved handling of
objects in memory. Instead of counting the bytes, it uses the
number of allocated pages from the "Pool for in-memory object data."

Duane W.
Received on Fri Oct 18 1996 - 11:39:24 MDT