WebSecurity: Local Content Filter Database
Provide the option for the Content Filtering URL database to be downloaded/cached/stored locally.. Reduces reliance of URL Filter performance on available bandwidth, increasing response times and lookup speeds.
Gert Hansen
shared this idea
The next version of our content filtering implementation in UTM 9.2 will offer a hybrid solution of on-disk and cloud-lookups to provide the best possible mix of resource usage and response times. Details to come!
28 comments
-
Andrew Holdeman
commented
This is a much needed/wanted feature in my neck of the woods as well, one thing I would love to see with it is have it download to the HDD & maintain a copy there that keeps getting updated so even if the http proxy dies/restarts/etc instead of having to re-download the entire DB from the net into active memory it'll take the copy from the HDD & put that into active memory
-
christian kueppers
commented
When is this next version in place? some 9.1 beta testers stated that it stopped working setting that with cc-tool.
will it be working in 9.1? -
Hescominsoon
commented
nice..it isn't a bandwidth issue as i have PROVEN multiple times. it is a problem of when the cff servers get slow..it's been mitigated some by an apparent addition of more cff instances..but not eliminated it.
-
Hi Salem,
The possibility exists to activate this easily via the command line for customers that have bandwidth limitations and benefit from this feature. We are looking at ways to make this permanent, however it requires a re-design of our web filter framework and scalability (especially during Up2Date) so we need more time to make this an official feature in the GUI,
-
Salem Aboshala
commented
We really need this urgently, our customers started complaining about it in a daily manner!!!!!!!
-
Hescominsoon
commented
what is the status of this for v9?
-
Hescominsoon
commented
is this truly a priority? if not just close this and let's be honest..then I can tell folks to turn this off and go from there.
-
Hescominsoon
commented
what is the status? is this planned for v9 at all? Is this going to be another broken promise?
-
Hescominsoon
commented
When is Astaro going to make good on its promise for this to be officially supported? It has been over a year(maybe longer).
-
Hescominsoon
commented
What is the status on this now? Still a technology preview? It's well tested by the community. Considering some of the lack of testing in other "features" i would make this one a priority.
-
Hescominsoon
commented
it is not hard to write int he script that powers this config option that if the machine has less than 3 gigs of ram it won't be able to be enabled.
-
Hescominsoon
commented
disk mode will be slower than mem mode just do to the fact the disk is orders of magnitude slower than ram..but there is still a performance boost from "cloud" to disk..:) The older units cannot be upgraded due to chipset limitations...have to complain to intel on that one..that is not something done by Astaro. If your machine can't handle more ram it's time for a new box.
-
Andrew Kay
commented
@Angelo: You may want to look at upping the allowed RAM limits on the appliances then. :) I've tested several installs on hardware & software and while the local content cache significantly improved our browsing experience, the disk mode is still noticeably slower then mem mode.
-
Hescominsoon
commented
it has not been rolled out as of the first two 8.2 releases. Considering other issues I would say this has gone back into a lower priority...
-
Incorrect. This has not been shelved, and we are still reviewing whether the final implementation will be production ready by 8.200's release. As previously stated, there are other factors to consider other than it just "already being possible at the command line". We need to closely monitor it for various appliance sizes and ensure it is ready to be "officially supported". We'll keep you informed. It is indeed in the beta (and 8.100) and can be enabled by a simple command line switch. Check the forums for a howto.
-
William Warren
commented
ti has been shelved for 8.2 as of right now. there's is now no commitment on this being in 8.2. NOt enthused.
-
Anonymous
commented
Hi, Is there any update on this feature, i noticed that it is not in the beta yet.
-
William Warren
commented
according to a forum post this is not going to be included in 8.2? at least not in this beta. is the intention still to include this in 8.2 or has this now been changed?
-
flaserra
commented
just delete my request, Comazzetto said that also low appliances can use this feature. More details here: http://www.astaro.org/astaro-gateway-products/web-security-http-https-ftp-im-p2p-web-filtering-antivirus/32060-web-browing-slowness-5.html#post160334
-
Andrew Kay
commented
The consultant wanted us to go with Fortigate. :-) When it came down to TCO's the appliances were the better option for us then the software.
