Ok, mystery solved.
Patch "HTTP: do not allow Proxy-Connection to override Connection header"
changes the behavior. And we indeed send from our clients:
Connection: close
Proxy-Connection: Keep-Alive
On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Ivan Larionov wrote:
> RPS didn't change. Throughput didn't c
14.07.2017 23:17, Amos Jeffries пишет:
> On 13/07/17 22:22, Yuri wrote:
>> Apologies are accepted. No problems. We ourselves were not pleased that
>> we did not have enough time to write the correct and beautiful patch. At
>> that time it was quite an unpleasant problem. The bottom line is that
>
On 07/14/2017 10:47 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> One UFS cache_dir can hold a maximum of (2^27)-1 safely.
You probably meant to say (2^25)-1 but the actual number is (2^24)-1
because the sfileno is signed. This is why you get 16'777'215 (a.k.a.
0xFF) as the actual limit.
> The index hash ent
On 13/07/17 22:22, Yuri wrote:
Apologies are accepted. No problems. We ourselves were not pleased that
we did not have enough time to write the correct and beautiful patch. At
that time it was quite an unpleasant problem. The bottom line is that
it's very specific and for me it's a big surprise t
On 14/07/17 04:13, bugreporter wrote:
Hi Amos,
When you say:
/"The rest is harder. You need to do a scan of a disk cache separating the
message headers - both counting the number of items found and total size
of the headers processed. Multiplying the metadata size by the number of
objects in th
On 15/07/17 00:37, Eliezer Croitoru wrote:
What would be the maximum ufs\aufs cache_dir objects? > Let say I have
unlimited disk space and inodes and RAM, what would be the
maximum objects I can store on a single ufs\aufs cache_dir?
One UFS cache_dir can hold a maximum of (2^27)-1 safely.
Te
On 07/14/2017 06:37 AM, Eliezer Croitoru wrote:
> What would be the maximum ufs\aufs cache_dir objects?
The maximum number of objects currently supported by any single
cache_dir (rock or ufs-based) is approximately 16777215.
> src/store/forward.h:enum { SwapFilenMax = 0xFF }; // keep in sync
On 07/14/2017 02:11 AM, bugreporter wrote:
> By doing so I'll get a new (or the same) rough estimation which is not what
> I'm really looking for.
You will get an accurate-enough formula, which is what you should be
looking for.
> Actually I need to have a formula based on the mean object size
On 15/07/17 03:11, Max Ashton wrote:
Dear squid-users,
I have just set up Squid Server 3.5.26 on Ubuntu 16.04.2 LTS configured with
SSL-bump. Http and Https is working fine but any web services that requires Web
Sockets fails with the error:
To support intercepting non-HTTP traffic on port 4
Dear squid-users,
I have just set up Squid Server 3.5.26 on Ubuntu 16.04.2 LTS configured with
SSL-bump. Http and Https is working fine but any web services that requires Web
Sockets fails with the error:
WebSocket connection to 'ws://speedtest.b4rn.org.uk:8080/ws' failed: Error
during WebSock
What would be the maximum ufs\aufs cache_dir objects?
Let say I have unlimited disk space and inodes and RAM, what would be the
maximum objects I can store on a single ufs\aufs cache_dir?
It's very easy to test but first I want to understand what might be the
limit?
I am asking since the structure
Hi Alex,
By doing so I'll get a new (or the same) rough estimation which is not what
I'm really looking for. Actually I need to have a formula based on the mean
object size so I can periodically (with a cron) get the mean object size and
with the help of that formula reconfigure Squid accordingly.
12 matches
Mail list logo
