|
Home > Archive > Squid > April 2004 > [squid-users] Re: squid tries to rebuild cache but fails...
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
[squid-users] Re: squid tries to rebuild cache but fails...
|
|
| Hanno.Wagner@boerse-stuttgart.de 2004-04-29, 6:54 pm |
|
Hi,
> because it claimed not to have enough storage space to store and it tried
> to rebuild the store database.
Make sure it is not running into a 2GB file size limit on any of the log
files..
That was one of my fears at first, but it hasn't happend.
> Also on Solaris situation can be worse if the filesytem is not tuned to
> optimize for space. The problem is that df includes block fragments in
the
> free space report, but for writes to larger files (>3KB or so) to succeed
> there needs to be full blocks available, not only fragments.
*ouch* okay, that was our problem. I saw that the dd was also able only to
write a file with 300MB or so, then it was out of disk space.
> space is most likely too fragmented to be useable. It helps reducing the
> cache size, but you may need to first delete some content to get Squid
> running again.
I simply recreated the filesystem.
Unfortunately, I can not just switch over to Linux for the squid (I'd love
to but our company wants only
Solaris-Boxes), therefore I can not do much to change the behaviour. Since
even Solaris ufs is quite
slow with small files, my question is: has anyone experience with Veritas
Filesystem used for Caching
purposes? Is it faster than Solaris ufs or has anyone on the list better
ideas (other storage types maybe)
and has already tested it on Solaris?
Ciao, Hanno
--
| |
| Henrik Nordstrom 2004-04-29, 6:55 pm |
| On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 Hanno.Wagner@boerse-stuttgart.de wrote:
> I simply recreated the filesystem.
>
> Unfortunately, I can not just switch over to Linux for the squid (I'd
> love to but our company wants only Solaris-Boxes), therefore I can not
> do much to change the behaviour.
Tuning the filesystem to optimize for space rather than speed quite
effectively avoids the fragmentation issue. See the Solaris UFS
documentation or the Squid FAQ section on Solaris for details.
I think there is also a patch from Sun which improves UFS to more
intelligently use the block fragments, but it probably needs some tuning
to work well with Squid.
Also, configuring squid.conf to use a smaller cache_dir also avoids the
issue, as it is only a problem if the filesystem is filled beyond it's
block capacity.
> Since even Solaris ufs is quite slow with small files, my question is:
> has anyone experience with Veritas Filesystem used for Caching purposes?
No experience of veritas here, but I do remember some guy which seemed to
know the veritas filesystem quite well claiming it is not suitable for
Squid due to it's extents based design. Details a bit fuzzy as it was very
long ago (several years).
But I have had quite positive reports about using Solaris UFS + Disksuite
transaction log (on separate device). If you have a Solaris 8 server then
this is a viable option as Disksuite should be included in your server
package. But this too was quite many years ago.
Also remember to mount the cache partition with noatime. This helps on
any OS (Solaris included) by reducing the amount of inode writes. Squid
does not use the filesystem atime detail so you can safely disable this on
a Squid cache partition. In fact I know of very few tools using the
atime timestamps.
Regards
Henrik
|
|
|
|
|