RE: which version shall i use?

From: Sparks, Alan <>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 15:29:31 -0700

I think I'd highly recommend 1.2beta23 with the 4-patch-set installed. I
*don't* run a high-volume cache here (it's for a 100+ users on our division
net), so can't speak for that. But, it has so far worked *very* well, and I
wouldn't go back to 1.1.x.

My $0.02.

-----Original Message-----
From: Xia Hao []
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 1998 2:47 PM
To: Jordan Mendelson
Subject: RE: which version shall i use?

I think i'm in a condition that's basically to yours. What specific
version are you using now? What features have you enabled? And can you
post a list of cites that won't work well with transparent proxy? That
might make its to FAQ i think...


On Tue, 11 Aug 1998, Jordan Mendelson wrote:

> > I don't believe any version of 1.2X is ready yet for the productions
> > release. What features of 1.2 do you need?
> Actually, the latest versions are quite stable even if the cachemgr provides
> 0 useful information now :)
> I run it as a transparent proxy (no async) and it seems to hold it's own, no
> crashes, uses about 96 megs of memory for a 4 gig cache (I like to allocate
> a lot of RAM...). It doesn't crash, I haven't found too many web sites it
> doesn't work with.. (damn Quicken software hates it though, but I'm pretty
> sure Quicken issues illegal requests).
> It does go a bit wacky if you try to kill the root owned process (kills the
> root process, doesn't notify the www process and then RunCache tries to
> restart it...
> Other than that, I run it in a production environment and haven't gotten any
> complaints from customers.
> Jordan
> --
> Jordan Mendelson :
> Web Services, Inc. :
Received on Tue Aug 11 1998 - 15:29:59 MDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:41:29 MST