Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 16:14:44 -0400 (EDT) From: <marty@mss.tzo.com> To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NetCache equivalents Message-ID: <20040420201444.1F02923C89@mss.tzo.com> In-Reply-To: <20040420190053.5C92916A4D9@hub.freebsd.org> (freebsd-isp-request@freebsd.org) References: <20040420190053.5C92916A4D9@hub.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At one point in the distant past (3 years ago) I worked for Infolibria, now Certeon, which made the Dynacache. At the time, if you wanted decent performance you would not choose Squid. I don't think it was because Squid was terrible, just that Dynacache, and others, were optimized to run fast. These days 3 GHz processors and multi-gigabyte memory are cheap so an out of the box Squid implementation might do the trick. Marty Sasaki
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040420201444.1F02923C89>