From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 9 08:27:17 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C81B016A401 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2007 08:27:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Artis.Caune@latnet.lv) Received: from esbens.latnet.lv (esbens.latnet.lv [159.148.19.115]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8265A13C49D for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2007 08:27:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Artis.Caune@latnet.lv) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by esbens.latnet.lv (Postfix) with ESMTP id 726EE11DB53; Fri, 9 Feb 2007 10:00:10 +0200 (EET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at esbens.latnet.lv Received: from esbens.latnet.lv ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (esbens.latnet.lv [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h6A26ADYGzBw; Fri, 9 Feb 2007 10:00:05 +0200 (EET) Received: from [159.148.108.180] (artis.latnet.lv [159.148.108.180]) by esbens.latnet.lv (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81889FE619; Fri, 9 Feb 2007 10:00:05 +0200 (EET) Message-ID: <45CC2A05.3010801@latnet.lv> Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 10:00:05 +0200 From: Artis Caune User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Macintosh/20061207) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org References: <20070208092346.072F513C47E@mx1.freebsd.org> <45CB8C33.7020608@FreeBSD.org> <45CB964C.8090409@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <45CB964C.8090409@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Steven Bens , Javier Henderson Subject: Re: Serious Bind issue X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 08:27:17 -0000 Doug Barton wrote: > Javier Henderson wrote: > >> FWIW, I was running BIND 9.3.2 for a while and in awe at the amount of >> memory it would use, and how it would go CPU bound after it hit any >> operating system imposed memory quotas. > > Many people have reported this problem, but no one has been able to > follow up on getting it fixed. > >> I went back to BIND 8.latest, and my problems went away. > > ... but only for the short term. Development has stopped on BIND 8, > and I'm planning to deprecate the BIND 8 ports now that FreeBSD 4.x > has been EOL'ed. BIND 9 is not even the wave of the future, it's now > the present, and if it's not working for you it's incumbent on you to > contact the bind-users@isc.org list and do what you can to help > diagnose this problem, and test the fixes. > > Doug > We have no problem with BIND 9.3.x. on 2.4 Xeon, 1G RAM: Getting ~1.6K queries per second. CPU: 11.5% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 1.9% interrupt, 86.5% idle PID UID THR PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 613 53 1 96 0 747M 746M RUN 0 62.7H 37.74% named # /boot/loader.conf kern.maxdsiz=1073741824 # named.conf max-cache-size 512M; recursive-clients 8192; and BIND is compiled with following changes: DNS_CACHE_CLEANERINCREMENT=256 in lib/dns/cache.c ISC_MEM_USE_INTERNAL_MALLOC=1 in lib/isc/mem.c And we get 1-3ms responses even while BIND is periodicaly cleaning cache and CPU is always idle.