On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 22:50:50 -0500 Roger Dingledine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 09:02:28PM +0100, Dominik Schaefer wrote: >> Scott Bennett schrieb: >> >The latest consensus file appears to have 0.2.0.18-alpha listed as >> >a recommended server version, but not 0.2.0.16-alpha or 0.2.0.17-alpha, >> >even though it still lists 0.2.0.11-alpha, 0.2.0.12-alpha, and >> >0.2.0.15-alpha. Also, the individual status documents are still in >> >considerable disagreement with each other. Are the directory authority >> >operators getting careless? >> Mhmm. I think, 16-alpha missed a file in the release and 17-alpha had a >> huge memory leak, I think, it is sane no to recommend them. > >Right. I dropped 0.2.0.16-alpha and 0.2.0.17-alpha from recommended server >versions for the reasons you cite. Any server running 0.2.0.17-alpha >is going to bloat to the point that it endangers other processes on >the machine.
Really! How long does it take to see this leak? Does the server have to be doing anything in special (e.g., involved in hidden services, being a directory mirror) to trigger the leak? I've been running 0.2.0.17-alpha since I first noticed in was available, at which time I think it had only been available for a day or two. I haven't yet seen the problem. The current instance on my machine has been running about 45.5 hours so far. It appears to be using about 3 MB less right now than it was using around nine hours ago. As far as I can recall, its memory usage has been within a few MB of what it has right now all the time. It sometimes goes up a little, and it sometimes goes down a little. It has never given me cause to suspect a leak. > >There are actually only three v2 authorities that recommend versions: >moria1, moria2, and tor26. And I believe just two of these (moria1 and >tor26) are the sole v3 authorities that recommend versions. Does that mean that if one goes down, we can't get a majority opinion on versions? > >So Scott, don't worry too much about the "careless" directory operators, >especially since we haven't ramped up to having more versioning >authorities yet. Our goal isn't to always keep them perfectly in sync >anyway -- the goal is to have the majority opinion be a reasonable one. Okay. Thanks for the news. > >> 18-alpha is different, but it is quite new, I would not be surprised if it >> is recommended not until a few days in the wild, but I don't know the >> policy about that. > >My Internet is not very good for this week, so I figured I'd push out >0.2.0.18-alpha (and change recommended versions) before I disappeared. You >can read its ChangeLog entry if you want a sneak preview; eventually >I'll send an official announce about it. > Okay. I just got it late last night and haven't yet had a chance to do anything with it beyond unpacking it. Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ********************************************************************** * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu * *--------------------------------------------------------------------* * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army." * * -- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * **********************************************************************