Re: Windows, yeeuch

From: Gregory Maxwell <>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 1997 19:02:06 -0400 (EDT)

The idea of running squid under NT seems stupid to me. Squid is designed
to have ultra-low latency and optimum performance. NT, as well as I can
asertain, was designed to be slow and to force users to upgrade yearly. :)
Microkernels have a reputation for poor efficiency (although, it is
frequently undeserved), NT takes such poor marks to new hights.

So SQUID and NT seem fundamently miss-matched. Novell would be a better

Anyone thinking of seriously running a WebCache will probably want a
dedicated computer anyways, and with FreeBSD and Linux it is MUCH more
cost effictive to stay away from NT. Unless, of course, all of your techs
can only handle NT. But, if thats the case you're screwed anyways.

And even if the cache will not be a dedicated computer, there are tons of
great apps for unix, esp. server type apps (web, ftp, file, etc.). And if
you are thinking of letting the cache double as a users workstation (as is
ALL togeather too common with NT servers), then you are a loopy fruit and
need some time in the looney bin.

On Thu, 4 Sep 1997, Oskar Pearson wrote:

> Hi All
> Anyone fiddled with getting squid to work under NT?
> Since it's been hacked to work on OS/2 it should be possible.
> The main use of squid (and all unix-based programs) is that they can be
> remotely configured properly... This would mean that we would have to
> have some kind of 'remote-configuration' util that we can use via
> (for example) a web browser.... This should probably work as a
> completely seperate project...
> Just imagine... we could get all those people currently using NT proxy
> to change over, and be able to fix their problems remotely!
> Unfortunately my time situation isn't the greatest... :)
> Oskar
Received on Thu Sep 04 1997 - 17:03:31 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:36:56 MST