Diskd seems better than aufs
Yesterday, in our Squid cache optimization trials “aufs” created problems. We have seen warning lines about “queue congestion in disk I/O operations” in cache.log and at the same time we have detected unreturned HTTP requests.
Then, we have tried “diskd” engine for cache storage system. Results were wonderful. After switching to “diskd”, warning lines or unreturned requests were disappeared.
Difference between “aufs” and “diskd”, in order to avoid blocking Squid main process with disk I/O requests, “aufs” delegates these requests to new POSIX threads, “diskd” delegates them to another separate process. And in our site, “diskd” gives better results.
I guess we’ll continue with “diskd”.
