Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 27 Jun 1995 03:39:56 +0400 (MSD)
From:      =?KOI8-R?Q?=E1=CE=C4=D2=C5=CA_=FE=C5=D2=CE=CF=D7?= aka "Andrey A. Chernov, Black Mage" <ache@astral.msk.su>
To:        davidg@Root.COM, John Capo <jc@irbs.com>
Cc:        freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freefall.cdrom.com>, Tom Samplonius <tom@uniserve.com>
Subject:   Re: mb_map full with GATEWAY and maxusers 64!
Message-ID:  <xTCLqxlOS9@astral.msk.su>
In-Reply-To: <199506262226.PAA17617@corbin.Root.COM>; from David Greenman at Mon, 26 Jun 1995 15:25:58 -0700
References:  <199506262226.PAA17617@corbin.Root.COM>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <199506262226.PAA17617@corbin.Root.COM> David Greenman
    writes:

>>I agree with Tom here.  But, it seems to me that there is an
>>underlying problem of some sort.  Why do I have to allow for 4Megs
>>of mbuf clusters to service some unknown transient event.  Once
>>this memory is in the mbuf map, its there forever.

>   Well, the usage is a function of the number of TCP connections. If you do a
>"netstat" and find a whole pile of connections (even ones in a closing state),
>then this explains it. This can easily happen to people using HTTP.

I wonder why it happens on my host, as I already said, user activity
was very low, and I am not running HTTP/anon FTP/IRCD/NFSD or other
network-consume daemons, just plain routed+named.

-- 
Andrey A. Chernov        : And I rest so composedly,  /Now, in my bed,
ache@astral.msk.su       : That any beholder  /Might fancy me dead -
FidoNet: 2:5020/230.3    : Might start at beholding me,  /Thinking me dead.
RELCOM Team,FreeBSD Team :         E.A.Poe         From "For Annie" 1849



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xTCLqxlOS9>