Skip to content

Commit ef93a7e

Browse files
committed
2026-02-16
1 parent 575929f commit ef93a7e

9 files changed

Lines changed: 422 additions & 22 deletions

File tree

squid-users/2026-February.txt

Lines changed: 162 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -1168,3 +1168,165 @@ known!
11681168
What is (not)happening here?
11691169
many thanks, L.
11701170

1171+
From brad at brad-house.com Sun Feb 15 20:00:33 2026
1172+
From: brad at brad-house.com (Brad House)
1173+
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2026 15:00:33 -0500
1174+
Subject: [squid-users] Performance issue -- serving from cache
1175+
In-Reply-To: <40488257-7285-479c-ac23-b6c2345afc34@treenet.co.nz>
1176+
References: <f771f546-f92e-4c74-9dd5-218653b3f701@brad-house.com>
1177+
<40488257-7285-479c-ac23-b6c2345afc34@treenet.co.nz>
1178+
Message-ID: <bc57fede-9470-4686-a033-7c2212633c8a@brad-house.com>
1179+
1180+
On 2/15/26 2:38 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
1181+
1182+
> On 15/02/2026 08:45, Brad House wrote:
1183+
>> I've got a squid deployment where serving from cache can be slower
1184+
>> than an uncached download.? I'm seeing speeds of around 50MB/s when
1185+
>> serving from cache, which is much slower than anticipated.? Infact,
1186+
>> when hitting fast upstream servers, serving of a non-cached asset is
1187+
>> faster (even though its still hitting squid to fetch it).
1188+
>>
1189+
>> I'm thinking there's got to be something wrong with my squid
1190+
>> configuration, I'm currently running on Rocky Linux 10 with Squid
1191+
>> 6.10-6.
1192+
>>
1193+
>
1194+
> When your networks I/O is faster than disk I/O, it is best not to
1195+
> store at all.
1196+
>
1197+
> Like so:
1198+
> ? acl fast_servers dst ...
1199+
> ? store_miss deny fast_servers
1200+
1201+
1202+
Our Disk I/O is a few orders of magnitude faster than our internet
1203+
speed, so caching should be able to serve much much faster.? ?I provided
1204+
benchmarks of our Disk I/O measured with FIO on the VM.? We also want to
1205+
be nice to upstream providers we are fetching from.
1206+
1207+
1208+
>> The VM I'm using currently has 4 cores, 16G RAM and 100G of usable
1209+
>> space.
1210+
>
1211+
> You have configured your Squid to use 318 GB of cache. That will not
1212+
> fit within 100 GB.
1213+
1214+
1215+
Sorry, I typo'd that number, it was supposed to say 400G:
1216+
1217+
Filesystem? ? ? Size? Used Avail Use% Mounted on
1218+
/dev/sda4? ? ? ?399G? ?14G? 385G? ?4% /
1219+
1220+
1221+
>> We have a large on site build system that spins up runners for GitHub
1222+
>> actions, and they're constantly fetching large assets from the
1223+
>> internet for each build, hence our desire for a caching proxy.? We'd
1224+
>> rather not switch to Apache Traffic Server as that doesn't have SSL
1225+
>> bump capability (we haven't yet enabled that capability in squid,
1226+
>> however). Hopefully there's a simple configuration I'm missing.
1227+
>
1228+
> In this case I think you want to prevent small objects from being
1229+
> stored in the disk cache. They can benefit from the fast network speed
1230+
> and should not inflate your bandwidth use much.
1231+
>
1232+
> ? cache_dir ... min-size=102400
1233+
1234+
1235+
We'd like to cache even small objects due to rate limiting we can hit at
1236+
the remote sites.? We're spawning thousands of GHAs a day all, a large
1237+
number of which fetch the same files (and we can't just change the fetch
1238+
location as we are building OSS packages which fetch these packages as
1239+
part of their build system).
1240+
1241+
1242+
>>
1243+
>> Just for testing I was pulling large image via http that is below my
1244+
>> max object size:
1245+
>> http://mirrors.edge.kernel.org/ubuntu-releases/20.04.6/
1246+
>> ubuntu-20.04.6-live-server-amd64.iso
1247+
>>
1248+
>> Configuration below:
1249+
>>
1250+
>> acl public src 0.0.0.0/0
1251+
>
1252+
> The above is the same as:
1253+
> ? acl public src ipv4
1254+
1255+
1256+
Thanks
1257+
1258+
1259+
>
1260+
>> acl SSL_ports port 443
1261+
>> acl Safe_ports port 80
1262+
>> acl Safe_ports port 443
1263+
>> http_access deny !Safe_ports
1264+
>> http_access deny CONNECT !SSL_ports
1265+
>> http_access allow localhost manager
1266+
>> http_access deny manager
1267+
>
1268+
>> http_access allow public
1269+
>
1270+
> This is bad. You have an Open Proxy.
1271+
>
1272+
> Even though "public" does not include all the IPv6 range, it does
1273+
> include every possible IPv4 machine on the Internet.
1274+
1275+
1276+
This is on a private internal network segment that only certain systems
1277+
can access (like GHA runners).? We use our firewalls to control access.
1278+
1279+
1280+
>
1281+
>> http_access deny to_localhost
1282+
>> http_access deny to_linklocal
1283+
>> http_access deny all
1284+
>
1285+
> A series of deny followed by "deny all" is only useful if you are
1286+
> supplying custom error pages.
1287+
1288+
1289+
Ok, these entries just came from the stock config install with the
1290+
package from rocky.
1291+
1292+
1293+
> FYI, All these ...
1294+
>
1295+
>> refresh_pattern deb$? ?129600 100% 129600
1296+
>> refresh_pattern udeb$? ?129600 100% 129600
1297+
>> refresh_pattern tar.gz$? 129600 100% 129600
1298+
>> refresh_pattern tar.xz$? 129600 100% 129600
1299+
>> refresh_pattern tar.bz2$? 129600 100% 129600
1300+
>> refresh_pattern \/(Packages|Sources)(|\.bz2|\.gz|\.xz)$ 0 0% 0
1301+
>> refresh-ims
1302+
>> refresh_pattern \/Release(|\.gpg)$ 0 0% 0 refresh-ims
1303+
>> refresh_pattern \/InRelease$ 0 0% 0 refresh-ims
1304+
>> refresh_pattern \/(Translation-.*)(|\.bz2|\.gz|\.xz)$ 0 0% 0 refresh-ims
1305+
>> refresh_pattern changelogs.ubuntu.com\/.*? 0? 1% 1
1306+
>>
1307+
>
1308+
> ... are only useful when the repository service does not obey HTTP/1.1
1309+
> properly. Otherwise they are detrimental.
1310+
>
1311+
> Good example, are those package tar/deb files. In a repository,
1312+
> packages contain their version details in the filename and URL. Once
1313+
> created they remain unchanged forever.
1314+
>
1315+
> Whereas, the above rules are forcing Squid to stop using any cached
1316+
> object and replace it once these files reach 90 days old.
1317+
1318+
1319+
That would obviously assume the upstream server is sending proper
1320+
cache-control headers, I haven't verified if that's the case.? I took
1321+
these rules from the squid-deb-proxy package, from what you're saying it
1322+
sounds like that package shouldn't exist anymore.
1323+
1324+
Are there any particular things I should try?? One use said to use rock
1325+
... are there particular settings?? Are there any known performance
1326+
issues with the 6.10 release I'm using?
1327+
1328+
Thanks.
1329+
1330+
-Brad
1331+
1332+

squid-users/2026-February/027801.html

Lines changed: 4 additions & 3 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@
1313
</style>
1414
<META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
1515
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="027800.html">
16-
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="027802.html">
16+
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="027804.html">
1717
</HEAD>
1818
<BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
1919
<H1>[squid-users] Performance issue -- serving from cache</H1>
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ <H1>[squid-users] Performance issue -- serving from cache</H1>
2525
<P><UL>
2626
<LI>Previous message (by thread): <A HREF="027800.html">[squid-users] Performance issue -- serving from cache
2727
</A></li>
28-
<LI>Next message (by thread): <A HREF="027802.html">[squid-users] dns_nameservers with port?
28+
<LI>Next message (by thread): <A HREF="027804.html">[squid-users] Performance issue -- serving from cache
2929
</A></li>
3030
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
3131
<a href="date.html#27801">[ date ]</a>
@@ -150,13 +150,14 @@ <H1>[squid-users] Performance issue -- serving from cache</H1>
150150
</PRE>
151151

152152

153+
153154
<!--endarticle-->
154155
<HR>
155156
<P><UL>
156157
<!--threads-->
157158
<LI>Previous message (by thread): <A HREF="027800.html">[squid-users] Performance issue -- serving from cache
158159
</A></li>
159-
<LI>Next message (by thread): <A HREF="027802.html">[squid-users] dns_nameservers with port?
160+
<LI>Next message (by thread): <A HREF="027804.html">[squid-users] Performance issue -- serving from cache
160161
</A></li>
161162
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
162163
<a href="date.html#27801">[ date ]</a>

squid-users/2026-February/027802.html

Lines changed: 4 additions & 3 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
1212
}
1313
</style>
1414
<META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
15-
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="027801.html">
15+
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="027804.html">
1616
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="027803.html">
1717
</HEAD>
1818
<BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ <H1>[squid-users] dns_nameservers with port?</H1>
2323
</A><BR>
2424
<I>Sun Feb 15 15:05:07 UTC 2026</I>
2525
<P><UL>
26-
<LI>Previous message (by thread): <A HREF="027801.html">[squid-users] Performance issue -- serving from cache
26+
<LI>Previous message (by thread): <A HREF="027804.html">[squid-users] Performance issue -- serving from cache
2727
</A></li>
2828
<LI>Next message (by thread): <A HREF="027803.html">[squid-users] dns_nameservers with port?
2929
</A></li>
@@ -54,11 +54,12 @@ <H1>[squid-users] dns_nameservers with port?</H1>
5454
</PRE>
5555

5656

57+
5758
<!--endarticle-->
5859
<HR>
5960
<P><UL>
6061
<!--threads-->
61-
<LI>Previous message (by thread): <A HREF="027801.html">[squid-users] Performance issue -- serving from cache
62+
<LI>Previous message (by thread): <A HREF="027804.html">[squid-users] Performance issue -- serving from cache
6263
</A></li>
6364
<LI>Next message (by thread): <A HREF="027803.html">[squid-users] dns_nameservers with port?
6465
</A></li>

squid-users/2026-February/027803.html

Lines changed: 1 addition & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ <H1>[squid-users] dns_nameservers with port?</H1>
5353
many thanks, L.
5454
</PRE>
5555

56+
5657
<!--endarticle-->
5758
<HR>
5859
<P><UL>

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)