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