trafficserver-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Plevyak <jplev...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Traffic Server 3.0 disk usage
Date Mon, 11 Jul 2011 20:04:04 GMT
I am not sure I understand this.  The "cache" is supposed to run on raw disk
(preferred) or
on a preallocated file, so "disk usage" should be fixed.

john

On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:08 AM, Adam Jefferiss <ajefferiss@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Sorry about the late reply, the logging disk usage seems to be running on
> average higher. Although the cache disk usage does peak the highest.
>
>
> On 24 June 2011 17:48, Billy Vierra <bvierra@sortatechie.com> wrote:
>
>> Adam,
>> Which disk usage is higher? Cache disk or logging disk?
>>
>>
>> On 06/24/2011 02:06 AM, Adam Jefferiss wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I've been using web-polygraph[1] to run some performance tests through
>>> traffic server 3.0 and have noticed that compared to 2.0.1 the disk usage is
>>> considerably higher on average, for example one run has 2.0.1 marked down at
>>> 18% disk usage on average while 3.0 is up to 50%.
>>>
>>> I've got logging set to errors only to test to see if the transaction
>>> logging was causing the problem, but without much difference between the
>>> two. I've also effectively disabled the cache in storage.conf by setting the
>>> cache size to 0, again without too much of a difference.
>>>
>>> Is there anything obvious that I've missed?
>>>
>>> We're looking at having traffic server replace our current proxy, but the
>>> disk usage results are causing a few concerns.
>>>
>>> Any information you guys you can point me towards would be great.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Adam
>>>
>>> [1] http://www.web-polygraph.org
>>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message