On 3 April 2013 20:05, Al Johnson <alj62888(a)yahoo.com> wrote: One 4GB Linode with Apache/MySQL/Lucene, two 1GB Linodes with Squid and a load-balancer in front of the lot. Pretty simple. I'd personally have gone with Varnish, but Squid is fine too. The boxes are Ubuntu 12.04 servers, just using the distro version of squid3. MediaWiki plays nice with Squid out of the box: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Squid_caching - d.

On 3 April 2013 20:24, OQ <overlordq(a)gmail.com> wrote: Well, we didn't do that. I don't *think* we did, anyway. - d.

On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Daniel Friesen <daniel(a)nadir-seen-fire.com> wrote: Which I thought was generally required to get a decent cache hit %. Or is that really a WMF specific issue?

Cool.  I'll probably give something like that a try, which will be my first.  I'm on AWS.  How do you like Linode? al ________________________________ From: David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> To: Al Johnson <alj62888(a)yahoo.com>om>; MediaWiki announcements and site admin list <mediawiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Sent: Wednesday, April 3, 2013 1:15 PM Subject: Re: [MediaWiki-l] BTW, this is why you put a cache in front of MediaWiki On 3 April 2013 20:05, Al Johnson <alj62888(a)yahoo.com> wrote: One 4GB Linode with Apache/MySQL/Lucene, two 1GB Linodes with Squid and a load-balancer in front of the lot. Pretty simple. I'd personally have gone with Varnish, but Squid is fine too. The boxes are Ubuntu 12.04 servers, just using the distro version of squid3. MediaWiki plays nice with Squid out of the box: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Squid_caching - d.