loosing packets

Tom Schmitt TomSchmitt at gmx.de
Fri Apr 21 08:45:34 UTC 2006

> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
> Von: Rick Jones <rick.jones2 at hp.com>

> Tom Schmitt <TomSchmitt at gmx.de> wrote:
> > Increasing the Buffersize from 2 MB to 4 MB didn't change anything.
> Are you certain that named isn't making a setsockopt() call of its own
> to set the SO_RCVBUF size?  Might want to fire-up truss and trace the
> system calls being made at startup.  Unless there is another way to
> see the SO_RCVBUF size of a given socket.

I don't know. I'll look into it, but I'm not very experienced with

> > I did a load-test with queryperf
> > and put ten times of the normal load on the server, doing more than
> > 100 thousend queries in about 25 seconds. But what did I see? There
> > was no increase of packet-loss. Instead, in this short period of
> > time, there was not one single packet lost. 

> How many queries did queryperf have outstanding at one time?  While it
> may indeed be something else, one has to make a distinction between
> servicing a steady-state load and the size of a burst that can be dealt
> with.
> Was your queryperf load from one system or many?  From how many
> different systems does your production system receive load?

I used the default-values of queryperf, but of course it's not the same like
the normal load: My queryperf load was only from one system. The production
system get it's load from about 20 thousend systems.

Analog-/ISDN-Nutzer sparen mit GMX SmartSurfer bis zu 70%!
Kostenlos downloaden: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/smartsurfer

More information about the bind-users mailing list