Hacker News Reader

Actually squid is fast enough for us :-) And, as I already pointed out in comments to the post:

Before choosing Squid 3.0 I've discussed this with percona guys (which I really trust since I worked there quite a while) and they shared with my some really weird stories from their experience (on boardreader.com) with Varnish (constant memory leaks, crashes, etc). So, I decided to go with Squid and pretty happy about the result so far.

Many things are faster...but Squid does an awful lot more.

C is faster than Ruby, but you're not suggesting building their apps in C. Why not? Because capabilities matter, too.

Yeah. But it looks like they have Nginx in front of Squid, so Nginx would still be a bottleneck if they used Varnish. It seems like the cache ought to be at the front of the stack.

Why would nginx be a bottleneck? and What kind of bottleneck do you mean?

When nginx proxies a request to Varnish, the response probably gets copied at least twice. If you had Varnish in front it would be zero-copy.