Re: hardware configurations?

On Thursday 24 October 96, at 8 h 3, the keyboard of Tom Fischer
<tfischer@panoramix.rain.fr> wrote:

> Has anyone done any qualitative testing between systems to determine
> if there is an optimal system to be used as a squid caching proxy
> (DEC vs IBM vs SGI vs pentium, etc.). I've seen that the US
> (as well as RENATER here in France) are using DEC Alpha systems (does
> anyone know why?).

You can ask us, dear colleague (cache@cache.cnrs.fr), or see the archives
of the Renater-Cache mailing list:

http://www.univ-rennes1.fr/LISTES/renater-cache@univ-rennes1.fr/

or our Web server:

http://cache.cnrs.fr/

Basically, we use OSF/1 because we knew it well ("we" = the two technical
managers of the box) and knew it can handle very high TCP/IP loads. We
use Digital because they made the cheapest proposal when requested. The
other choices considered were HP, Sun and SGI. All were much more
expensive. We considered the use of a PC/Linux but were afraid of its
ability to handle such loads (two regional caches, including the largest
of the cache network, use PC/Linux and are very happy with it. Ten new
regional caches are under construction, all with Linux.)

Stephane Bortzmeyer Institut Pasteur
bortzmeyer@pasteur.fr Service d'Informatique Scientifique
                              Paris, France
+33 01 40 61 34 62

http://web.cnam.fr/personnes/bortzmeyer/home_page.dom
Received on Fri Oct 25 1996 - 00:17:23 MDT