On 12/7/06, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote:
Squid in "transparent reverse proxy" mode isn't a bad choice, although
I don't know offhand whether it queues/clusters concurrent requests
for the same URL in the way you want. I suggest the "transparent"
deployment (netfilter/netlink integration) because you can slap it in
with no changes to the origin server and yank it out again if you have
a problem. The challenge is in getting conntrack to scale to a
zillion concurrent sessions, but you could probably find someone in
your crowd who knows something about that. :-)
Ignore any documentation that talks about httpd_accel_*. Configuring
transparent mode is a great deal simpler and saner in squid 2.6 than
it used to be; you just add a "transparent" parameter to the http_port
tag. With or without this tag, you set up what used to be called
"accelerator mode" using some parameters to http_port and cache_peer,
as described in
http://www.squid-cache.org/mail-archive/squid-users/200607/0162.html.
If transparent mode looks like the right thing for kernel.org, you
might be interested in some netfilter hackery to offload part of the
conntrack session lookup load to a front-end box that blocks DDoS and
acts more or less as an L4 switch plus session context cache. I've
been banging on a proof of concept implementation for a while, and am
currently working on integrating against 2.6.19 by splitting
nf_conntrack into front and back halves that interact via a sort of
Layer 2+ header. I have no idea yet whether it will have any
scalability benefit on dual-x86_64 class hardware (it was originally
conceived for rigid cache architectures where the random access
patterns of session lookups have drastic cache effects).
Cheers,
- Michael
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html