From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Oct 26 13:36:50 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D586A37B401 for ; Sat, 26 Oct 2002 13:36:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (out2.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.3.120]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B97943E75 for ; Sat, 26 Oct 2002 13:36:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from silby@silby.com) Received: from [10.1.1.6] (d139.as9.nwbl0.wi.voyager.net [169.207.133.205]) by out2.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2C7E295A4; Sat, 26 Oct 2002 15:36:42 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 15:41:42 -0500 (CDT) From: Mike Silbersack To: Ian Campbell Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sfbuf problems In-Reply-To: <3DB8611D.1040507@damnit.org> Message-ID: <20021026153933.M29780-100000@patrocles.silby.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Ian Campbell wrote: > I tried a hack sendfile replacement with write() and lseek(), just > to see if that made a difference... but all it did was chew mbufs > instead of sf_bufs ... How can I tell if I'm just using all available > buffer space, or if it's just a leak I'm not seeing? How can I increase > available kvm if it becomes necessary? Once you shutdown the server, does netstat -na show all the connections dying off, and does netstat -m show mbuf usage dropping back to normal? If connections die off properly and the number of mbufs drops back to normal, then there is probably no leak. During normal usage, it is entirely possible to max out mbuf usage without there being a memory leak. Mike "Silby" Silbersack To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message