Size a file backed cache

[Sean Allen]

I understand that. Let me rephrase that question. When using file storage,
am I correct in assuming, that the overhead uses additional space on the
volume that the file itself is on?


On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Stephen Wood <smwood4 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Ultimately the amount of overhead space needed is determined by the number
> of objects you have. The overhead is about 1k per object. You can read more
> at *Sizing Your Cache*<https://www.varnish-cache.org/docs/3.0/tutorial/sizing_your_cache.html>on the varnish doc.
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Sean Allen <sean at monkeysnatchbanana.com>wrote:
>
>> I know when using malloc storage, that we end up based on our object
>> size, about another 100% percent memory to store additional booking info.
>> So where we have a
>>
>> -s malloc, 6g
>>
>> We need a total of 12g available to the OS.
>>
>> If I switch to
>>
>> -s file, 10g
>>
>> Do I need 20g of HD space available on that drive?
>> I'm unclear how the issues with malloc map to file storage backend.
>> For example, why does file default to 50% sizing of the volume?
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> varnish-misc mailing list
>> varnish-misc at varnish-cache.org
>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
>>
>
>


-- 

Ce n'est pas une signature
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/pipermail/varnish-misc/attachments/20130410/59ed60c1/attachment.html>