The new on-disk cache implementaion

[Ahmed Al -Ghafri]

That's
 great Juli, let me try your new updated implementation then give you 
feedback. I am wondering if two WANproxy machines can be put  in between
 a WAN link so that they are doing optimization in a bridge mode, where 
there
will be no need to touch the IP configurations in the existing network. 
Is that possible to be achieved?  By that we can have two great modes, 
proxy and bridge.

> From: juli at clockworksquid.com
> Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 23:20:07 -0700
> Subject: Re: The new on-disk cache implementaion
> To: al-ghafri at hotmail.com
> CC: wanproxy at lists.wanproxy.org
> 
> Ahmed,
> 
> I went through several incomplete implementations that predate
> Diego's, and I have plans to extend it beyond his work; I wanted to
> start from a design that would extend to support the features and
> functionality I intend to include, and some that were needed today,
> including the ability to share a single on-disk cache between multiple
> peers.
> 
> Upload and download both go into the cache, but they do not share
> data, at least not yet.  So a segment from one peer will not be used
> to deduplicate data from another peer.  Whether this is done in the
> future is an open question; it raises a lot of issues about
> configurations with many-to-many relationships.  It might be worth
> having a configuration parameter to share a cache for local and remote
> segments in one-to-one configurations.
> 
> Let me know if your issue persists with the latest code.
> 
> Thanks,
> Juli.
> 
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Ahmed Al -Ghafri
> <al-ghafri at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello Juli,
> >
> > Excellent and great advance in WANProxy for this month. Finally, on-disk
> > cache is in progress
> > to be supported officially. I wanted to ask, what is the difference between
> > your on-disk cache implementation
> > and Deigo implementation? I mean why you started from scratch, and not build
> > on what Deigo has done?
> >
> > Another thing, in the current implementation, is the on-disk cache works two
> > ways direction, I mean upload/download both are considered to fill the
> > cache?
> >
> > BTW, last time I faced a problem showing error:[/zlib/inflate_pipe] ERR:
> > virtual void InflatePipe::consume
> > If you can help I would be appreciated; here is the link:
> > http://lists.wanproxy.org/pipermail/wanproxy-wanproxy.org/2015-January/001555.html
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ahmed
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wanproxy.org/pipermail/wanproxy-wanproxy.org/attachments/20150426/e82daf8a/attachment.htm>