Re: Features

From: Gregory Maxwell <>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 08:32:40 -0500 (EST)

On Mon, 24 Nov 1997, Donovan Baarda wrote:

> I've been thinking about compression and caches a bit lately.
> Compression can have two useful effects;
> 1) reduce the storage space of the object in the cache.
> 2) reduce the bandwidth of inter-cache transfers.
> A compressed file system gives you 1) but doesn't give you the benefit of
> reduced memory usage that truely compressed objects would. Using ssh as
> above gives you 2) but with a CPU hit. Using both gives you both but
> wastes CPU in a major way (fs has to decompress object off disk, ssh has
> to re-compress it to send it, remote ssh decompresses it, remote fs has to
> re-compress it to disk).
> If squid could be hacked to store and forward compressed objects, you
> would get both benefits with reduced CPU overhead. Just an idea...

Personally, I dont think that full object compression would be that hot..
In a big cache it wouldnt be needed.. In a small cache, even with it,
objects wont stay around long enough to do any good.. Remember, that
compression is always more expensive then decompression..

I think that link compression would be of a bigger advantage.. :)

But hey.. If someone wants to do it.... I prob wont use it.. But I'm sure
it would help some people..
Received on Mon Nov 24 1997 - 05:47:35 MST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:37:42 MST