Hi ,
Valgrind report w.r.t this leak will help people to analyse the exact cause.
Regards,
Manjit
Abhimanyu Chowdhary wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When I do snmpwalk over mib-2, agent crashes after like 15 hours
> because of memory leak.
> Now, what I have seen is the memory only leaks when it is going
> t
Hi,
When I do snmpwalk over mib-2, agent crashes after like 15 hours because of
memory leak.
Now, what I have seen is the memory only leaks when it is going through
ipCidrRoteTable,
and it always goes down in multiple of 28K. I saw their were some issues
with this[BUG 1596638],
I patched that, eve
Hi,
I am trying to implement an intermediate interface that facilitates an
entirely dynamic (no mib) subagent (I think - I am still unsure on the
terminology). The example
http://www.net-snmp.org/dev/agent/delayed__instance_8c-example.html seems to
be the closest example of what I need to do bu
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 22:19:17 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> > I'm pretty solidly against modifying our static config files in place.
DS>
DS> I'm very solidly against modifying static config files in place!
:-)
DS> The two options that I was thinking of were:
DS>a) Support for configuring such entrie
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:21:40 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> > - try convincing the IETF to re-open the evolution of SNMP working group
and
DS> > define a standard for OID compression and bulk data transfer. ;-)
DS>
DS> - try experimenting with the provisional implementation that was developed
DS>
Given that I am running RedHat 5 and Ubuntu 10.04 I am a bit surprised
to see (keep seing) this message.
It seems that this is caused by defining HAVE_LIBRPM depending on it
being required by swinst_rpm, and compiling swinst_rpm being dependent
on librpm being available. Circular dependancy.
I ha
Thanks Dave ...
Dave Shield wrote:
> On 21 July 2010 14:16, Manjit wrote:
>
>> Yes, i have configured the ipv6.
>> ./configure --with-mib-modules="mibII/ipv6"
>>
>
> That includes support for the IPv6 MIB modules.
> It does not include support for SNMP over IPv6 as a transport mechanism.
On 21 July 2010 17:10, Robert Story wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 08:35:56 +0100 Dave wrote:
> DS> On 21 July 2010 07:42, Prakash wrote:
> DS> > Is there any options to optimize the snmp bandwidth,
> DS> > because we are using a large table with 122 rows and 21 columns.
> DS> > When I use snmpwalk
