Bernard Li wrote: > Hi Vaibhav: > > On 1/22/08, Kumar Vaibhav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I am using ganglia-3.0.5 on a woodcrest processor cluster. and I see >> that after running for weeks the memory consumption of the gmond process >> is something about 400 MB. I tried to debug the problem by isolating a >> single node. But the problem continues with slower rate (rss memory >> growth). I tried to run the >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# valgrind --leak-check=full gmond -d 1 >> ==2381== Memcheck, a memory error detector. >> ==2381== Copyright (C) 2002-2006, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al. >> ==2381== Using LibVEX rev 1658, a library for dynamic binary translation. >> ==2381== Copyright (C) 2004-2006, and GNU GPL'd, by OpenWorks LLP. >> ==2381== Using valgrind-3.2.1, a dynamic binary instrumentation framework. >> ==2381== Copyright (C) 2000-2006, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al. >> ==2381== For more details, rerun with: -v >> ==2381== >> slurpfile() open() error on file >> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_max_freq: No such file or >> directory >> ==2381== >> ==2381== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 5 from 1) >> ==2381== malloc/free: in use at exit: 1,446,345 bytes in 1,479 blocks. >> ==2381== malloc/free: 1,877 allocs, 398 frees, 1,503,962 bytes allocated. >> ==2381== For counts of detected errors, rerun with: -v >> ==2381== searching for pointers to 1,479 not-freed blocks. >> ==2381== checked 521,104 bytes. >> ==2381== >> ==2381== 69 bytes in 16 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 5 of 16 >> ==2381== at 0x4A05809: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:149) >> ==2381== by 0x37258750E1: strndup (in /lib64/libc-2.5.so) >> ==2381== by 0x408CEC: (within /usr/sbin/gmond) >> ==2381== by 0x40418C: (within /usr/sbin/gmond) >> ==2381== by 0x404FB8: (within /usr/sbin/gmond) >> ==2381== by 0x405FFE: (within /usr/sbin/gmond) >> ==2381== by 0x372581D8A3: (below main) (in /lib64/libc-2.5.so) >> ==2381== >> ==2381== LEAK SUMMARY: >> ==2381== definitely lost: 69 bytes in 16 blocks. >> ==2381== possibly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks. >> ==2381== still reachable: 1,446,276 bytes in 1,463 blocks. >> ==2381== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks. >> ==2381== Reachable blocks (those to which a pointer was found) are not >> shown. >> ==2381== To see them, rerun with: --show-reachable=yes >> >> >> Can you suggest what is the problem? > > What OS are you running? I have tried it on Scientific linux 5.0 (a clone of RHEL 5.0). I see similar problem in Scientific linux 4.1 ( clone of RHEL 4 update 1). > > BTW, the reason why your post was awaiting moderator approval is > because you didn't subscribe to the list please do so: I had a subscription to ganglia-developers mailing list. I regularly get mails from this mailing list.
> > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/ganglia-developers > > Also, this discussion is more relevant in ganglia-general: Is it neccessary? Or my problem is solved here only. > > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/ganglia-general > > Cheers, > > Bernard > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Ganglia-developers mailing list > Ganglia-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ganglia-developers ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Ganglia-developers mailing list Ganglia-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ganglia-developers
