We had Cisco Cache engine 2.0 running for a while and was seeing 60% savings. Then we upgrades to the Content engine and the savings decreased to around 19%. Now we have had to add a QOSWorks box which also does caching and it seems to have slowed us down. Does having two cache engines running cause a battle between the two? We turned the Content engine off and the internet seemed a bit faster without it..not significantly though. I would have thought though that it would be noticeably slower without it. Any ideas?
Running 2 cache engines in the network does not cause a battle between the 2, but what could likely happen if there is no hierarchy is that the users might be using either of them and both would have to cache the pages requested by the users which would be a waste of resources and would take more time to receive it the first time. The savings could have decreased due to lower no. of hits also. Try using one them, or use explicit proxy in which case you configure the browsers with the IP of the cache they would need to use to improve the performance. Are you using WCCP version 2? If so here is a troubleshooting document that might help.
Topology & Design:
Two ACI fabrics
Stretching VLANs using OTV
Both fabrics are advertising BD subnets into same routing domain
Some BDs(or say VLANs) are stretched, but some are not.
Endpoints can move betwee...
VMware Trunk Port Group is supported from ACI version 2.1
VMM integration must be configured properly
ASA device package must be uploaded to APIC
ASAv version must be compatible with ACI and device package version
Topology &Design:Traffic flow within same fabric:Endpoint moves to Fabric-2Bounce Entry Times OutTraffic Black-holedSummarySolutionAppendix:
In the Previous articles of ACI Automation, we are using Postman/Newman a...