File descriptors

[Todd]

I see there is a "files" directive for named.conf - does it
override/set the OS files limit, or if I set it to 5000, and the OS
says 256, am I stuck at 256?



On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Todd <canadaboy at gmail.com> wrote:
> My apologies - that was silly of me.
>
> The servers in question are running a mix of BIND versions .. 9.2.3,
> 9.2.4, 9.3.2, 9.3.4, 9.4.1, 9.4.2-p2, the majority are 9.3.4 and
> 9.4.2-P2
>
> Cheers.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 2:32 PM, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
> <Jinmei_Tatuya at isc.org> wrote:
>> At Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:14:27 -0500,
>> Todd <canadaboy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> We ran into an issue this morning with some caching DNS servers.  One
>>> of the zones we heavily rely on was having DNS issues, which appears
>>> to have been causing very slow responses to us.  The servers in
>>> question handle about 500queries/second.
>>>
>>> These particular servers are configured with "recursive-clients 5000",
>>> which we thought would be sufficient.  However, before we even reached
>>> 5000, the server started boinking because of "socket: too many open
>>> file descriptors" errors in syslog.
>>>
>>> So, the question is, do we need a 1:1 mapping of fle descriptors to
>>> max queries, + overhead for named?  From reading, I see that a socket
>>> uses a file descriptor, so my assumption is yes, but I wanted to check
>>> with Those Who Are Wiser Than I before I write a change ticket to get
>>> these things fixed.
>>>
>>> If I do need to allow more file descriptors, what is the best method
>>> to ensure that the named process has an appropriate number?
>>
>> Before answering the questions: which version of BIND (you didn't even
>> say it was a BIND, but I guess it is for the obvious reason:-) are you
>> using?
>>
>> ---
>> JINMEI, Tatuya
>> Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.
>>
>