Re: [squid-users] CARP setup

Scrolling back to my first response in this thread:

http://marc.info/?l=squid-users&m=122366977412432&w=2

On tis, 2008-10-21 at 21:18 +0530, Paras Fadte wrote:
> Hi Henrik,
>
> Thanks for your reply. What would be your suggestion for a CARP setup
> which would provide an efficient caching system?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> -Paras
>
> On 10/16/08, Henrik Nordstrom <henrik_at_henriknordstrom.net> wrote:
> > On tor, 2008-10-16 at 09:42 +0530, Paras Fadte wrote:
> > > Hi Henrik,
> > >
> > > In CARP setup, if one uses same weightage for all the parent caches
> > > how would the requests be handled ? will the requests be equally
> > > forwarded to all the parent caches ? if the weightages differ then
> > > won't all the requests be forwarded to a particular parent cache only
> > > which has the highest weightage ?
> >
> >
> > CARP is a hash algorithm. For each given URL there is one CARP parent
> > that is the designated one.
> >
> > The weights control how large portion of the URL space is assigned to
> > each member.
> >
> >
> > > Also if I do not use the "proxy-only" option in the squid which
> > > forwards the requests to parent caches, won't less number of requests
> > > be forwarded to parent caches since it will be already cached by squid
> > > in front of the parent caches?
> >
> >
> > Correct. And it's completely orthogonal to the use of CARP. As I said
> > most setups do not want to use proxy-only. proxy-only is only useful in
> > some very specific setups. These setups MAY be using CARP or some other
> > peering method, the choice of peering method is unrelated to proxy-only.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Henrik
> >
> >