Recommended value for max-cache-size for cache-only shared hosts..
dougb at dougbarton.us
Mon Jun 4 19:53:31 UTC 2012
On 06/04/2012 11:36, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
> At Fri, 1 Jun 2012 21:14:06 +0000,
> Dan Mason <danmason at qwest.net> wrote:
>>> cleaning interval has been effectively no-op since BIND 9.5. Tweaking
>>> it won't improve performance, although it shouldn't cause a bad effect
>> If your cache is too small the CPU will peg when the cleaning-interval goes. Maybe that's changed but the behavior still exists in the 9.7 branch. Setting your cache size really depends on your query load. On a resolver doing 15,000/qps having a cache of 256M will cause a problem during the cleaning-interval whereas if it's 2G you won't notice the interval at all. Also on a busy resolver expect BIND to use about twice as much as where you set your limits.
> Hmm, looking into the code again, I realized my memory was slightly
> incorrect: "cleaning interval has been effectively no-op since BIND
> 9.5" should have been "cleaning interval has been effectively
> meaningless and therefore disabled by default since BIND 9.5", and if
> you explicitly enable it by setting cleaning-interval to a non 0
> value, it will still do meaningless but expensive operations.
> So, in conclusion, my main point should still stand: "Tweaking it
> (cleaning-interval) won't improve performance". And, it could
> actually do harm.
Thanks, I learned something today! But that sort of prompts the question
in my mind, why does the option still exist?
If you're never wrong, you're not trying hard enough
More information about the bind-users