[Zope] Squid vs Apache+mod_proxy+mod_gzip

Toby Dickenson tdickenson@geminidataloggers.com
Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:33:45 +0100

On Saturday 07 June 2003 19:30, george donnelly wrote:

> My question is, in your experience, how does Squid match up against Apache
> 1.3 + mod_proxy + mod_gzip in the areas of speed and robustness?

I am happy with squid so far. Ive never felt its speed or robustness lacking.

Its SSL handling is a little less mature.... I have had some problems in the 
past, but havent been able determine whether the blame lies with openssl or 

No problems big enough to drive me back to apache though.

> also, with squid, how do people get useful logs for analysis by awstats etc
> out of it? based on what I've looked at, the logs are not as detailed as
> those given by apache.

The squid native log has extra fields relating to proxying that apache logs do 
not (for example, which back-end zope server handled the request, and why 
that one was chosen). I am using Analog which parses this log nicely, 
ignoring the fields that it doesnt know about.

The squid native log is missing referrer and user agent information, but those 
fields are stored in seperate log files.

Is there anything else you thought was missing?

Toby Dickenson