Hi, All 2013/5/9 Michal Privoznik <[email protected]> > On 08.05.2013 11:42, Jarod. w wrote: > > 2013/4/16 Michal Privoznik <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > > > On 16.04.2013 11:29, Alex Leonhardt wrote: > > > Ah great, thanks! > > > > > > Alex > > > > In general, it can be a bit difficult to determine the exact commit > > which fixes problem you are seeing, because it depends on you > concrete > > use case. However, you can try running libvirtd with valgrind and see > > where libvirtd leaks the most. This as disadvantage of libvirtd > running > > a bit slower but on the other hand, if it is such huge leak even a > > little while should do. Maybe you will discover a new leak :) > > > > I met this issue.thanks > > Can you run under valgrind to catch the root cause of the leak? > Or can you update to prove the leak was fixed? > The memory leak issue have been fixed on libvirt-0.10.2-18.el6_4.4. The libvirtd is still using ~13M of resident memory after the host has been running for about +10 days with about 20 VMs running on it. Before, I used libvirtd which version is 0.9.10-21.el6_3.7 on the same environment( days and vms),the libvirtd was using ~1.5G of resident memory.
> > Michal > > -- --- Best Regards Jarod.W
_______________________________________________ libvirt-users mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvirt-users
