bind memory usage
Sam.Wilson at ed.ac.uk
Mon Dec 15 17:38:29 UTC 2008
In article <gi5sh1$f17$1 at sf1.isc.org>, schulz at adi.com (Thomas Schulz)
> In article <gi2uke$2d89$1 at sf1.isc.org>,
> <leolistas at solutti.com.br> wrote:
> >[base64 guff]
> You know, the above is not very usefull. Can someone please fix the
> newsgroup gateway.
The content is below. I forward it only because it's actually concrete
result that might be useful to someone.
I just test bind 9.5.0-P2 and 9.5.1-rc1
Bind 9.5.0-P2 allocate over 2Gb per 10 minutes of work.
Bind 9.5.1 allocate 2Gb per 30 hours.
14.12.2008, <D0><B2> 2:15, JINMEI Tatuya /
> At Sat, 13 Dec 2008 11:50:52 -0200,
> Leonardo Rodrigues Magalh<C3><A3>es <leolistas at solutti.com.br> wrote:
>> i'm trying to run bind 9.5.0-P2 on a very low memory system.
>> It's a
>> RouterBoard 450 with 32Mb RAM running OpenWRT.
>> root at sede:~# cat /proc/meminfo
>> MemTotal: 29920 kB
>> the problem is that bind seems to consume a LOT of memory ...
>> a lot for low memory devices, i never noticed that on machines with
>> of RAM.
>> question is .... is there something i can do to low bind's memory
>> usage and successfully run it on those very low embedded devices ???
> Admittedly, BIND9 tends to require a lot of memory. I'm not sure if
> it can reasonably function with a total system memory of 32MB.
> Some related points:
> - if you enable threads, disable them. With the thread support BIND9
> will require even more memory.
> - "max-cache-size 1048576" is a meaningless configuration:
> Any positive values less than 2MB will be ignored reset
> to 2MB.
> (from ARM)
> - 'rndc flush' doesn't release allocated system memory. It just
> frees all cache entries within the BIND9 process, so it's not
> surprising that you didn't see the memory footprint decrease after
> the flush operation.
> JINMEI, Tatuya
> Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.
> bind-users mailing list
> bind-users at lists.isc.org
bind-users mailing list
bind-users at lists.isc.org
More information about the bind-users