Bind Memory Usage
Hi all, I have just upgraded from Bind 9.7 to Bind 9.8.1 Patch 1 and is noticing that the occupied physical memory is increasing to values larger than usual. Whilst in the former release the occupied physical memory stabilises at a value of approximately 4GB, I am now noticing that the occupied memory is using all the 16GB available to the server. Was there any major change or could this be a memory leak in the named daemon process? I am using a Solaris 10 Operating System running on Oracle Hardware with Sparc Architecture. Regards Patrick Cauchi ___ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Re: bind memory usage
At Wed, 17 Dec 2008 23:36:31 -0200, Leonardo Rodrigues Magalhães wrote: > > I can confirm bind 9.4 does run on an (IBM, not Intel) 486-SCL/2 with 16 MB. > > That cpu can address no more than 16 MB. > i have tried running 9.4.3 instead of 9.5.0-P2 and got odd results. I suspect you should compare 9.4.3 with 9.5.1 (currently rc). There are many differences between pre-and-post P1/P2 versions. So you may be comparing an apple with an orange (even though you may already be comparing different fruits by comparing 9.4 with 9.5, though). --- JINMEI, Tatuya Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ___ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Re: bind memory usage
Peter Dambier escreveu: I can confirm bind 9.4 does run on an (IBM, not Intel) 486-SCL/2 with 16 MB. That cpu can address no more than 16 MB. i have tried running 9.4.3 instead of 9.5.0-P2 and got odd results. 9.5.0-P2 right after start. Not a single query was made to it, just the daemon started: r...@sede:/# pmap 26858 26858: /usr/sbin/named -c /etc/bind/named.conf [ ] total 6644K r...@sede:/# with 9.4.3, compiled the exact way 9.5.0-P2 was compiled, threads disabled, the very same config file. r...@sede:/etc/init.d# pmap 27726 27726: /usr/sbin/named -c /etc/bind/named.conf [ . ] total 8056K r...@sede:/etc/init.d# So, at least here, 9.4.3 seems to use more memory than 9.5.0-P2. i was thinking that maybe the fact i'm running on a MIPS and with uclibc (instead of common glibc) plataform has some difference on results you got from x86 platform do you think this could have some relation to the memory usage ??? r...@sede:/# cat /proc/cpuinfo system type : Atheros AR7130 rev 2 (id:0xa8) processor : 0 cpu model : MIPS 24K V7.4 just for information, i'm also running squid on this RouterBoard with 32Mb of RAM. After some config file tweaks, i got a stable memory usage of about 5,5-6Mb. And that's quite stable even during peak times. Of course all in-memory caches are disabled as well as disk-caches. Squid is just running for blocking somethings and logging. Anyway, on the same machine i did the memory usage tests above, squid seems to be doing very well, stable memory use. -- Atenciosamente / Sincerily, Leonardo Rodrigues Solutti Tecnologia http://www.solutti.com.br Minha armadilha de SPAM, NÃO mandem email gertru...@solutti.com.br My SPAMTRAP, do not email it ___ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Re: bind memory usage
In article , sch...@adi.com (Thomas Schulz) wrote: > In article , > =?UTF-8?B?TGVvbmFyZG8gUm9kcmlndWVzIE1hZ2FsaMOjZXM=?= > wrote: > >[base64 guff] > > > You know, the above is not very usefull. Can someone please fix the > newsgroup gateway. The content is below. I forward it only because it's actually concrete result that might be useful to someone. Sam I just test bind 9.5.0-P2 and 9.5.1-rc1 Bind 9.5.0-P2 allocate over 2Gb per 10 minutes of work. Bind 9.5.1 allocate 2Gb per 30 hours. 14.12.2008, 2:15, JINMEI Tatuya / <9E><98><8E><81><94> <93><89> <81>(): > At Sat, 13 Dec 2008 11:50:52 -0200, > Leonardo Rodrigues Magalhes wrote: > >>i'm trying to run bind 9.5.0-P2 on a very low memory system. >> It's a >> RouterBoard 450 with 32Mb RAM running OpenWRT. >> >> r...@sede:~# cat /proc/meminfo >> MemTotal:29920 kB >> >>the problem is that bind seems to consume a LOT of memory ... >> well, >> a lot for low memory devices, i never noticed that on machines with >> BS >> of RAM. > > [snip] > >>question is is there something i can do to low bind's memory >> usage and successfully run it on those very low embedded devices ??? > > Admittedly, BIND9 tends to require a lot of memory. I'm not sure if > it can reasonably function with a total system memory of 32MB. > > Some related points: > - if you enable threads, disable them. With the thread support BIND9 > will require even more memory. > - "max-cache-size 1048576" is a meaningless configuration: > Any positive values less than 2MB will be ignored reset > to 2MB. > (from ARM) > - 'rndc flush' doesn't release allocated system memory. It just > frees all cache entries within the BIND9 process, so it's not > surprising that you didn't see the memory footprint decrease after > the flush operation. > > --- > JINMEI, Tatuya > Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. > ___ > bind-users mailing list > bind-users@lists.isc.org > https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users > ___ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users ___ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Re: bind memory usage
In article , =?UTF-8?B?TGVvbmFyZG8gUm9kcmlndWVzIE1hZ2FsaMOjZXM=?= wrote: >CgpQZXRlciBEYW1iaWVyIGVzY3JldmV1Ogo+IEkgY2FuIGNvbmZpcm0gYmluZCA5LjQgZG9lcyBy >dW4gb24gYW4gKElCTSwgbm90IEludGVsKSA0ODYtU0NMLzIgd2l0aCAxNiBNQi4KPiBUaGF0IGNw >dSBjYW4gYWRkcmVzcyBubyBtb3JlIHRoYW4gMTYgTUIuCj4KPiAkIGNhdCAvcHJvYy9tZW1pbmZv >Cj4gICAgICAgICB0b3RhbDogICAgdXNlZDogICAgZnJlZTogIHNoYXJlZDogYnVmZmVyczogIGNh >Y2hlZDoKPiBNZW06ICAxNDU0MDgwMCAxMDU5NjM1MiAgMzk0NDQ0OCAgMzE5NDg4MCAgMTAwMzUy >MCAgMzUxODQ2NAo+ICAgCgogICAgdmVyeSBnb29kIHRvIGtub3cgdGhhdCA5LjQgaXMgcnVubmlu >ZyBPSyBvbiBhIDE2TWIgbWFjaGluZSwgYSAKc2l0dWF0aW9uIGV2ZW4gd29yc3QgdGhhbiBtaW5l >LCB3aGljaCBpcyAzMk1iIDopICAuLi4uIGknbGwgdHJ5IHRvIAppbnN0YWxsIDkuNCB0aGlzIHdl >ZWsgaW5zdGVhZCBvZiA5LjUgYW5kIGNoZWNrIGlmIGl0IGhhcyBhIHNsb3dlciBtZW1vcnkgCmZv >b3RwcmludC4KCiAgICB0aGFua3MgZm9yIHRoZSB0aXAgISEhCgotLSAKCgoJQXRlbmNpb3NhbWVu >dGUgLyBTaW5jZXJpbHksCglMZW9uYXJkbyBSb2RyaWd1ZXMKCVNvbHV0dGkgVGVjbm9sb2dpYQoJ >aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zb2x1dHRpLmNvbS5icgoKCU1pbmhhIGFybWFkaWxoYSBkZSBTUEFNLCBOw4NP >IG1hbmRlbSBlbWFpbAoJZ2VydHJ1ZGVzQHNvbHV0dGkuY29tLmJyCglNeSBTUEFNVFJBUCwgZG8g >bm90IGVtYWlsIGl0CgoKCgpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f >X19fX19fXwpiaW5kLXVzZXJzIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdApiaW5kLXVzZXJzQGxpc3RzLmlzYy5vcmcK >aHR0cHM6Ly9saXN0cy5pc2Mub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vYmluZC11c2Vycw== You know, the above is not very usefull. Can someone please fix the newsgroup gateway. -- Tom Schulz sch...@adi.com ___ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Re: bind memory usage
I just test bind 9.5.0-P2 and 9.5.1-rc1 Bind 9.5.0-P2 allocate over 2Gb per 10 minutes of work. Bind 9.5.1 allocate 2Gb per 30 hours. 14.12.2008, в 2:15, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 написал(а): At Sat, 13 Dec 2008 11:50:52 -0200, Leonardo Rodrigues Magalhães wrote: i'm trying to run bind 9.5.0-P2 on a very low memory system. It's a RouterBoard 450 with 32Mb RAM running OpenWRT. r...@sede:~# cat /proc/meminfo MemTotal:29920 kB the problem is that bind seems to consume a LOT of memory ... well, a lot for low memory devices, i never noticed that on machines with BS of RAM. [snip] question is is there something i can do to low bind's memory usage and successfully run it on those very low embedded devices ??? Admittedly, BIND9 tends to require a lot of memory. I'm not sure if it can reasonably function with a total system memory of 32MB. Some related points: - if you enable threads, disable them. With the thread support BIND9 will require even more memory. - "max-cache-size 1048576" is a meaningless configuration: Any positive values less than 2MB will be ignored reset to 2MB. (from ARM) - 'rndc flush' doesn't release allocated system memory. It just frees all cache entries within the BIND9 process, so it's not surprising that you didn't see the memory footprint decrease after the flush operation. --- JINMEI, Tatuya Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ___ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users ___ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Re: bind memory usage
Peter Dambier escreveu: I can confirm bind 9.4 does run on an (IBM, not Intel) 486-SCL/2 with 16 MB. That cpu can address no more than 16 MB. $ cat /proc/meminfo total:used:free: shared: buffers: cached: Mem: 14540800 10596352 398 3194880 1003520 3518464 very good to know that 9.4 is running OK on a 16Mb machine, a situation even worst than mine, which is 32Mb :) i'll try to install 9.4 this week instead of 9.5 and check if it has a slower memory footprint. thanks for the tip !!! -- Atenciosamente / Sincerily, Leonardo Rodrigues Solutti Tecnologia http://www.solutti.com.br Minha armadilha de SPAM, NÃO mandem email gertru...@solutti.com.br My SPAMTRAP, do not email it ___ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Re: bind memory usage
JINMEI Tatuya / escreveu: question is is there something i can do to low bind's memory usage and successfully run it on those very low embedded devices ??? Admittedly, BIND9 tends to require a lot of memory. I'm not sure if it can reasonably function with a total system memory of 32MB. Some related points: - if you enable threads, disable them. With the thread support BIND9 will require even more memory. yes threads are already disabled. Compilation is done this way: CONFIGURE_ARGS += \ --enable-shared \ --enable-static \ --enable-ipv6 \ --with-randomdev="/dev/urandom" \ --disable-threads \ --with-openssl="$(STAGING_DIR)/usr" \ --with-libtool \ --with-libxml2=no \ , \ BUILD_CC="$(TARGET_CC)" \ - "max-cache-size 1048576" is a meaningless configuration: Any positive values less than 2MB will be ignored reset to 2MB. (from ARM) i do RTFM :) and on the options section, max-cache-size description, there's nothing about that. But if you say so, i'm sure it's there somewhere :) I have done a quick search on 9.5 ARM and really didnt find it . anyway, i successfully found that validation on the code ... dns_cache_setcachesize and DNS_CACHE_MINSIZE . anything smaller than 2Mb is replaced by 2Mb. Anyway, even the 1Mb being meaningless, it would force the DNS_CACHE_MINSIZE (2Mb) to be used and not the default one which is 32Mb. Even if the 1Mb parameter is ignored, the 2Mb would be something to me, comparing to 32Mb default one. anyway, thanks for the tip. I would never realize that. -- Atenciosamente / Sincerily, Leonardo Rodrigues Solutti Tecnologia http://www.solutti.com.br Minha armadilha de SPAM, NÃO mandem email gertru...@solutti.com.br My SPAMTRAP, do not email it ___ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Re: bind memory usage
I can confirm bind 9.4 does run on an (IBM, not Intel) 486-SCL/2 with 16 MB. That cpu can address no more than 16 MB. $ cat /proc/meminfo total:used:free: shared: buffers: cached: Mem: 14540800 10596352 398 3194880 1003520 3518464 Swap: 133885952 11907072 121978880 MemTotal: 14200 kB MemFree: 3852 kB MemShared: 3120 kB Buffers:980 kB Cached:3436 kB SwapTotal: 130748 kB SwapFree:119120 kB So it is consuming 11 MB swap right now. Bind performs reasonably. It is my local resolver and it is running an alternative root-zone plus a couple of other zones. vanadium up 5+14:18, 1 user, load 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 It is running for 5 and a half days now. Freshly started the swapsize is zero but after a day or two swap is waxing, never waning. Kind regards Peter JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote: > At Sat, 13 Dec 2008 11:50:52 -0200, > Leonardo Rodrigues Magalhães wrote: > >> i'm trying to run bind 9.5.0-P2 on a very low memory system. It's a >> RouterBoard 450 with 32Mb RAM running OpenWRT. >> >> r...@sede:~# cat /proc/meminfo >> MemTotal:29920 kB >> >> the problem is that bind seems to consume a LOT of memory ... well, >> a lot for low memory devices, i never noticed that on machines with BS >> of RAM. > > [snip] > >> question is is there something i can do to low bind's memory >> usage and successfully run it on those very low embedded devices ??? > > Admittedly, BIND9 tends to require a lot of memory. I'm not sure if > it can reasonably function with a total system memory of 32MB. > > Some related points: > - if you enable threads, disable them. With the thread support BIND9 > will require even more memory. > - "max-cache-size 1048576" is a meaningless configuration: > Any positive values less than 2MB will be ignored reset > to 2MB. > (from ARM) > - 'rndc flush' doesn't release allocated system memory. It just > frees all cache entries within the BIND9 process, so it's not > surprising that you didn't see the memory footprint decrease after > the flush operation. > > --- > JINMEI, Tatuya > Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. > ___ > bind-users mailing list > bind-users@lists.isc.org > https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users -- Peter and Karin Dambier Cesidian Root - Radice Cesidiana Rimbacher Strasse 16 D-69509 Moerlenbach-Bonsweiher +49(6209)795-816 (Telekom) +49(6252)750-308 (VoIP: sipgate.de) mail: pe...@peter-dambier.de http://www.peter-dambier.de/ http://iason.site.voila.fr/ https://sourceforge.net/projects/iason/ ULA= fd80:4ce1:c66a::/48 ___ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Re: bind memory usage
At Sat, 13 Dec 2008 11:50:52 -0200, Leonardo Rodrigues Magalhães wrote: > i'm trying to run bind 9.5.0-P2 on a very low memory system. It's a > RouterBoard 450 with 32Mb RAM running OpenWRT. > > r...@sede:~# cat /proc/meminfo > MemTotal:29920 kB > > the problem is that bind seems to consume a LOT of memory ... well, > a lot for low memory devices, i never noticed that on machines with BS > of RAM. [snip] > question is is there something i can do to low bind's memory > usage and successfully run it on those very low embedded devices ??? Admittedly, BIND9 tends to require a lot of memory. I'm not sure if it can reasonably function with a total system memory of 32MB. Some related points: - if you enable threads, disable them. With the thread support BIND9 will require even more memory. - "max-cache-size 1048576" is a meaningless configuration: Any positive values less than 2MB will be ignored reset to 2MB. (from ARM) - 'rndc flush' doesn't release allocated system memory. It just frees all cache entries within the BIND9 process, so it's not surprising that you didn't see the memory footprint decrease after the flush operation. --- JINMEI, Tatuya Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ___ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
bind memory usage
Hi, i'm trying to run bind 9.5.0-P2 on a very low memory system. It's a RouterBoard 450 with 32Mb RAM running OpenWRT. r...@sede:~# cat /proc/meminfo MemTotal:29920 kB the problem is that bind seems to consume a LOT of memory ... well, a lot for low memory devices, i never noticed that on machines with GBs of RAM. Right after starting, bind uses 15% of my system memory, which would be about almost 4,5Mb. And memory usage grows when requests are being answered. I have seen bind using 25% of my memory, which would be about 7.5Mb. Of course there's all the cache stuff, which i tried to limit with: max-cache-size 1048576; but it didnt helped much even with very few thing stored on cache, which i can check with 'rndc stats', bind memory keeps growing to unnaceptable levels given my very low memory resources. rndc flush, which should empty the cache, simply didnt low memory usage, thus showing that it's not the cache that's eating that much memory. just for comparison, maradns, another caching nameserver (not simply dns forwarder, it's a recursive server) that i'm used to run on OpenWRT, has a memory usage of about 1Mb and it didnt vary too much from that. Of course maradns dont have LOOOTS of features bind has but i'm really interested on running bind because i'll have to configure some DNSSec verifications and none of these 'small' DNS servers do that. question is is there something i can do to low bind's memory usage and successfully run it on those very low embedded devices ??? -- Atenciosamente / Sincerily, Leonardo Rodrigues Solutti Tecnologia http://www.solutti.com.br Minha armadilha de SPAM, NÃO mandem email gertru...@solutti.com.br My SPAMTRAP, do not email it ___ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users