From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 3 03:45:37 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: hackers@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F409E16A41A for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 03:45:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jonny@jonny.eng.br) Received: from coe.ufrj.br (roma.coe.ufrj.br [146.164.53.65]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97B6013C467 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 03:45:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jonny@jonny.eng.br) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by coe.ufrj.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C5F11256C0; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 00:45:35 -0300 (BRT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at coe.ufrj.br Received: from coe.ufrj.br ([146.164.53.65]) by localhost (roma.coe.ufrj.br [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1vKiB8sHNrcO; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 00:45:30 -0300 (BRT) Received-SPF: none (coe.ufrj.br: 201.19.161.98 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of jonny.eng.br) client-ip=201.19.161.98; envelope-from=jonny@jonny.eng.br; helo=[201.19.161.98]; Received: from [201.19.161.98] (unknown [201.19.161.98]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by coe.ufrj.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A5621256BE; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 00:45:29 -0300 (BRT) Message-ID: <46B2A4DC.4080000@jonny.eng.br> Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 00:45:32 -0300 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jo=E3o_Carlos_Mendes_Lu=EDs?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Don Lewis References: <200708022120.l72LKRUS001446@gw.catspoiler.org> In-Reply-To: <200708022120.l72LKRUS001446@gw.catspoiler.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Problems with rpc.statd and PAE X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 03:45:37 -0000 Don Lewis wrote: > On 31 Jul, João Carlos Mendes Luís wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Sent this to -questions, but got no answer. Now I'll try -hackers... >> >> I've just configured my first server with 4G RAM. To use it, I had >> to select PAE in kernel config. I was a little bit troubled by it's >> advice not to use modules (is it that critical?), but got it running. >> >> But when it is running on PAE, NFS statd refuses to run: >> >> # /etc/rc.d/nfslocking start >> Starting statd. >> rpc.statd: unable to mmap() status file: Cannot allocate memory >> Segmentation fault >> # >> >> Using strace I found it was trying to mmap the status file, at >> /var/db/statd.status: >> >> open("/var/db/statd.status", O_RDWR) = 10 >> mmap(0, 268435456, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, 10, 0) = -1 ENOMEM >> (Cannot allocate memory) >> >> It's really strange to have mmap len = 256M, specially because the >> file is always small. But it works without PAE, and do not work with >> PAE. And it is described in the handbook: >> >> http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/faq/book.html#STATD-MEM-LEAK >> > > I've been seeing this same problem for a long time on an 7.0-CURRENT > i386 machine with 1GB of RAM, and I'm not using PAE. I haven't > discovered any obvious cause for the problem. > It's a production file server, so I cannot make any test today, but this weekend I'll try to recompile statd to use less memory. Is there a good reason to map 256M at once? Jonny -- João Carlos Mendes Luís - Networking Engineer - jonny@jonny.eng.br