Re: [squid-users] squid file system

ext3 is faster than ext2 in one of its modes (writeback, I believe) by a
small margin. But last time I tried (admittedly in a Red Hat 2.4.9
kernel--so pretty old now) I could oops it at will within a few minutes
with a moderate Squid workload.

All crashers that I've ever found in ReiserFS for Squid workloads were
fixed nearly two years ago, and I've never had problems since. And it
still benchmarks significantly faster than ext2/3 for Squid workloads.

Brian wrote:
> Squid deals with many, many tiny files.
> Your best is reiserfs mounted with noatime,notail
>
> XFS and JFS are probably your next choices, for better directory handling.
>
> Ext2 is well-tested and rock solid, but cache contents is not unique or
> original and you probably don't want to fsck it.
>
> -- Brian
>
> On Friday 10 May 2002 02:27 am, Hamed Abangar wrote:
>
>>Dear members
>>
>>which file system is more suitable for squid directories?
>>
>>Ext2 or Ext3 or another??
>>
>>Thanks
>>
>>Hamed Abangar
>>
>>
>>
>>---------------------------------
>>Do You Yahoo!?
>>Yahoo! Shopping - Mother's Day is May 12th!
>

-- 
Joe Cooper <joe@swelltech.com>
http://www.swelltech.com
Web Caching Appliances and Support