still have named memory leak

[lconrad at go2france.com]

On Friday 12/12/2014 at 10:12 am, Mukund Sivaraman  wrote:
> Hi Len
>
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 09:52:23AM -0600, lconrad at go2france.com wrote:
>>
>> binary upgraded Freebsd 10 to Freebsd 10.1
>>
>> named  9.10.1, compiled from source
>>
>> at named start, 305 MB memory
>>
>> after several hours of running named is approaching 800 MB. I'm sure 
>> after a
>> couple of days, as before, it will head towards 2000 MB
>>
>> suggestions?
>>
>> this is a recursive only NS, about 20M q/day restricted by ACL to
>> "ournetworks"
>
> This tells us that the named process size grows large, but more
> information is needed to discover why. Can you send us the following?
>
> 1. Your named configuration.
>
> 2. Regular dumps over time of the statistics that are available via
> HTTP, as the named process grows. See the "statistics-channels"
> documentation in the manual. You can use curl or wget to dump them to 
> a
> file.
>
> By looking at the statistics file (it's available as XML and JSON), we
> can see if any memory contexts grow large and that could point to 
> where
> this large amount of memory is being used.
>
> Also, did you use a max-cache-size option when running the above 
> named?
>
> Mukund

With earlier Freebsd 10 and bind 9.10, max-cache didn't limit the 
growth in named memory size.

named.conf sent privately.

I'll work on your other points.

Len




>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20141212/19286619/attachment.html>