Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

We want to invest in a Cache Appliance solution to reduce our bandwidth and improve the user experience.

Which cache appliance do you recommend? So far I have these candidates CacheBOX and CacheMara.

We want a full commercial product (that includes hardware) so we can get a full-package support as well.


share|improve this question

closed as not constructive by Tom O'Connor, Sam Jan 21 '12 at 11:56

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

Why do you want to spend money on an "appliance box" which will just be an Atom Server, running Debian 6 and Squid?

Just get a cheap server, run Debian 6 on it, and install Squid.

Seriously. Appliance boxes aren't all they're cracked up to be, generally. Sure, there's "support", which is expensive. There's also the risk that they won't be quite as pro-active as they could be on updates, and security patches, and your new-fangled appliance box, actually becomes a weak point in your network. You won't know about this, because it's a hands-off black box.

Screw the appliances. Get a server. Run Squid on it. If you need support, use the community, or hire a contract sysadmin.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.