At Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:14:27 -0500, Todd <canada...@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. _______________________________________________ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
