From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 28 17:20:46 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8932D16A418 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:20:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from mail.potentialtech.com (internet.potentialtech.com [66.167.251.6]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E9F813C46E for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:20:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from vanquish.ws.pitbpa0.priv.collaborativefusion.com (pr40.pitbpa0.pub.collaborativefusion.com [206.210.89.202]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.potentialtech.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 159F2EBC3B; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:20:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:19:46 -0500 From: Bill Moran To: chloe K Message-Id: <20080128121946.2f6fec2a.wmoran@potentialtech.com> In-Reply-To: <610180.9814.qm@web57406.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <610180.9814.qm@web57406.mail.re1.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.7 (GTK+ 2.12.1; i386-portbld-freebsd6.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: name server X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:20:46 -0000 In response to chloe K : > Hi all > > I am using the name server in freebsd 6.1 > there are 2G memory but top is only using > Mem: 207M Active, 420M Inact, 185M Wired, 112M Buf, 1158M Free > > How can I increase the box performance used for name server only? > I want to use most of memory in cache name server What makes you think it needs any more memory? A caching nameserver isn't a terribly memory-intensive unit. In the past, I've run quite peppy systems on a few hundred megs of RAM. I expect the 207M is all the system actually needs. Even if you figure 1K per entry, that's still 200,000 names it has cached. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com