On 9/22/19 10:28 AM, --Ahmad-- wrote: > Looking forward to hearing that bug fixed .
Me too! However, please do not misinterpret my response as a confirmation of the bug existence or an implication that somebody is working on a fix. I do not know whether anybody is working on this. I do not even recall if somebody has filed a corresponding bug report. https://wiki.squid-cache.org/SquidFaq/AboutSquid#How_to_add_a_new_Squid_feature.2C_enhance.2C_of_fix_something.3F Alex. >> On Sep 22, 2019, at 5:07 PM, Alex Rousskov wrote: >> >> On 9/22/19 6:25 AM, --Ahmad-- wrote: >> >>> i tested squid 4.8 and delay pools not working with it at all . >>> i reverted back to squid 3.5.x and i had delay pools working . >> >>> Q1- do squid 4 support delay pools ? >> >> It should. If it does not, there is a bug somewhere. >> >> >>> Q2- with squid 3.5.x we have SMP about 4 childs , and we are running delay >>> pools . >>> does that mean speed ( with all 4 instances ) is 1/1 Mbps >>> or speed ( with all 4 instances ) is 4/4 Mbps? >> >> According to [1], delay pools are not SMP-aware yet so you are >> essentially configuring individual worker limits: Workers do not share >> their limits and pools with each other. Hence, the effective Squid >> instance limit is, very approximately, the aggregate of those configured >> individual worker limits. For example, if each worker is limited by >> 1Mbps, then the 4-worker instance may produce up to 4Mbps traffic. >> >> In reality, since individual workers usually receive different amounts >> of traffic (especially until [2] is unblocked), the effective instance >> limit will be more than 1Mbps and less than 4Mbps. >> >> [1] https://wiki.squid-cache.org/Features/SmpScale#What_can_workers_share.3F >> >> [2] https://github.com/squid-cache/squid/pull/369 >> >> Alex. _______________________________________________ squid-users mailing list squid-users@lists.squid-cache.org http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
