memory footprint

Farid Hamjavar hamjavar at unm.edu
Tue Dec 12 19:15:19 UTC 2000


On Tue, 12 Dec 2000, Kevin Darcy wrote:

> Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 13:24:29 -0500
> From: Kevin Darcy <kcd at daimlerchrysler.com>
> To: bind-users at isc.org
> Subject: Re: memory footprint
> 
> 
> Farid Hamjavar wrote:
> 
> > hello
> >
> > bind 8.2.2-p7 on aix 4.3.3 w/256 MB RAM
> >
> > The named process has been up for 2 days, 3  hours  and
> > the  size  of  memory  it  is  using is 41MB and slowly
> > growing which I think is normal.  Is  it  effective  to
> > reduce  the memory foot print via reducing the 'minimum
> > ttl' from currently 8 hour to 1 hour?
> 
> I'm not sure what "minimum TTL" you're talking about. For each of your
> master zones, there is a "default TTL" and a "negative caching TTL", but
> that only affects your *master* data, which won't directly change your
> memory footprint one way or the other (although if those values are set
> too low, then the additional query volume might indirectly use up more
> memory for network buffers and so forth). A couple of parameters that
> might save you _some_ memory resources are "max-ncache-ttl" and/or
> "cleaning-interval". Tweaking those might help keep your cache clear of
> old stale entries, but only at the expense of using more CPU and network
> resources. I doubt it will help much.
> 
> Why don't you just let the process run for a while and see where it
> stabilizes its usage?







I was referring to what appears in  nslookup  query  of
the  SOA  record  of  our  domain.  And I have a script
running which tells me basically that memory  footprint
of named is increasing by about 3MB per day.  I guess I
need  to tweak all parameters you mentioned unless with
information I provided there  is  a  specific  one  you
could tell me that I need to re-adjust....

Thanks, Farid




> 
> 
> - Kevin
> 
> 
> 




More information about the bind-users mailing list