From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Jul 11 14:29:56 1995 Return-Path: questions-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id OAA05411 for questions-outgoing; Tue, 11 Jul 1995 14:29:56 -0700 Received: from giant.mindlink.net (root@giant.mindlink.net [204.174.18.2]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id OAA05402 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 1995 14:29:52 -0700 Received: by giant.mindlink.net (Smail3.1.28.1 #5) id m0sVmsC-0001fkC; Tue, 11 Jul 95 14:29 PDT Message-Id: From: a00776@giant.mindlink.net (Toomas Losin) Subject: INN 1.4 and size of nnrpd processes To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 14:29:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Length: 590 Sender: questions-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk Here's a question for anyone running INN under 2.0.5R. We're currently running two news servers, the main one running FreeBSD and the other one SCO Unix. Under FreeBSD the size of the nnrpd processes is about 800k (VSZ) according to ps, versus 500k under SCO. The only difference between the machines is a much longer expire time under FreeBSD. Would that explain the size difference? I know nnrpd loads the active file, but that's only 250k. Any ideas? One other weird thing we've noticed is that occasionally an nnrpd will grow to 17 megs. Anyone seen something like this before?