On 02/12/08 18:55, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
At Tue, 12 Feb 2008 18:10:12 +0100,
Attila Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Then named will listen on [your_ip_address]:some_port, and you can
browse internal statistics by accessing
http://[your_ip_address]:some_port with your browser. When you notice
the memory starts growing, retrieving the information several times,
and compare the "Memory" section at the end of the page. If the
memory hog is inside named, there should be significant growth in some
of the rows accordingly.
Here are the results:
http://people.fsn.hu/~bra/freebsd/bind950-memory-20080212/
and at the end, the relevant line from top.
Is this FreeBSD leaking then?
Looking at the last stat
http://people.fsn.hu/~bra/freebsd/bind950-memory-20080212/bind4
even the total of "MaxUse" is about 69MB, while the ps output
indicates the resident size is 441MB. So, yes, there should be
something odd not directly related to the named's (normal) behavior.
Can you try the same test with only one worker thread (by using the
'-n 1' command line option)? Then we may be able to chase the problem
further.
Of course. See the bindn1 files at the same location. (only the memory
section included)
The effect is pretty much the same.
--
Attila Nagy e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Free Software Network (FSN.HU) phone: +3630 306 6758
http://www.fsn.hu/
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
