8.2.2 Zone Sizing

Simon Waters Simon at wretched.demon.co.uk
Wed Jan 9 00:08:28 UTC 2002


Martin Rusterholz wrote:
> 
> - does anybody have experince with zones of 45'000 A records or even
> more?

I haven't done dynamic zones this large, although I've done
planning work on the assumption people will have zones that
large, and may want to go dynamic in future.

If the data is important to you (and if it isn't why are you
capturing it), then DDNS has some issues with redundancy as the
primary DNS can become a single point of failure for it's zones
if you are not careful.... 

> - is there a difference for BIND handling 20'000 updates a day in a
> zone of 45'000 A RR's or having them splitt into a number of smaller
> zones?

How are you planning for failure?

If the primary DNS fails what will happen, if it happens for one
zone is that as bad...

IXFR is assumed so zone transfer shouldn't be a problem,
although I'd test performance and capacity issues carefully. I
found BIND needed a little tuning before it handled 10,000's of
zones well, although the number of records in a zone was less
important, it also eats more bytes per record than I'd expected.
Not such a problem in these days of cheap memory, as it is bytes
per record, not Kbytes per record, but you wouldn't want to run
out unexpectedly.

Cricket is touring Europe in a week or so to explain this to us
all http://www.miceandmen.com/8000/8600_roadshow.html

Zurich any good for you?


More information about the bind-users mailing list