On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Dossy wrote:
On 2004.01.08, John Shafto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was running nsd v.3.4.2 on a fairly active website
(FreeBSD 4.x os) for a few weeks and had some
trouble with the nsd process growing. I was restarting
the process every few days as it grew to
In a message dated 1/11/2004 12:03:36 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It seems that one way to address this memory/heap problem is to force
threads to exit after a certain amount of time idle, freeing their
entire heap area. There is code in AS to do that, but I've never
On 2004.01.09, Andrew Piskorski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 12:31:39PM -0800, Jim Wilcoxson wrote:
fragmentation problems - not necessarily leaks. Just restart your
server once a day/week.
Which is still quite frequently, and thus very conservative. From
In a message dated 1/10/04 12:03:58 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A dynamic content server tends to grow in our
experience, and I've always assumed that's because of heap
fragmentation problems - not necessarily leaks. Just restart your
server once a day/week.
Yes -- memory fragementation
Here's a script to dump out the memory pool info:
set text
set elname blocksize nfree nget nput nrequest nlock nwait
foreach pel [ns_info pools] {
append text \nPoolname: [lindex $pel 0]\n
set i 0
foreach el [lindex $pel 1] {
append text [lindex $elname $i]: $el\n
On 2004.01.10, Jim Wilcoxson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems that one way to address this memory/heap problem is to force
threads to exit after a certain amount of time idle, freeing their
entire heap area. There is code in AS to do that, but I've never
gotten it to work successfully
--- John Shafto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Doing what?
This particular machine only has a 512mb of ram,
and serves mostly static content. I have bigger
plans for it though.
AOLserver is NOT Apache. Get used to that.
I'll try to keep them straight. Thanks for the
tip.
Am I the only
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 11:22:50AM -0800, Nathan Seven wrote:
If I've only got 50mb of static content that it's serving up, and
then pushing some db stuff through the back, what on earth would
possibly make the process use 2gb+?
Nothing. I think Dossy was being facetious. Most people using
My personal opinion is that one of the responses to this simple
question was pretty shitty, and totally inaccurate.
In our experience, an image-serving copy of AOLserver with 30 threads
configured runs in about 25MB, regardless of the load, and serving
dynamic content on 30 threads takes
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 12:31:39PM -0800, Jim Wilcoxson wrote:
fragmentation problems - not necessarily leaks. Just restart your
server once a day/week.
Which is still quite frequently, and thus very conservative. From
what I've heard many people don't restart their AOLservers for months.
I
On 2004.01.09, Andrew Piskorski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 12:31:39PM -0800, Jim Wilcoxson wrote:
fragmentation problems - not necessarily leaks. Just restart your
server once a day/week.
Which is still quite frequently, and thus very conservative. From
what I've
I was running nsd v.3.4.2 on a fairly active website
(FreeBSD 4.x os) for a few weeks and had some
trouble with the nsd process growing. I was restarting
the process every few days as it grew to 40-60Mb.
I posted a couple messages on this list about
v4.0 and using port 80 as I was trying to run
aolserver_v35_bp
?
--
Untied we stand, fettered we fall.
- Original Message -
From: Scott Goodwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 15:37
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] nsd and memory leaks
No, you're not being paranoid. Are you using nscgi and running CGI
scripts
fall.
- Original Message -
From: Scott Goodwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 15:37
Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] nsd and memory leaks
No, you're not being paranoid. Are you using nscgi and running CGI
scripts? If so, then you're running into this problem
On 2004.01.08, John Shafto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was running nsd v.3.4.2 on a fairly active website
(FreeBSD 4.x os) for a few weeks and had some
trouble with the nsd process growing. I was restarting
the process every few days as it grew to 40-60Mb.
40-60MB is nothing. I'd worry if
I was running nsd v.3.4.2 on a fairly active website
(FreeBSD 4.x os) for a few weeks and had some
trouble with the nsd process growing. I was restarting
the process every few days as it grew to 40-60Mb.
40-60MB is nothing. I'd worry if your nsd grows beyond 2GB.
Doing what?
This
On 2004.01.08, John Shafto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
40-60MB is nothing. I'd worry if your nsd grows beyond 2GB.
Doing what?
Just about anything. If your stacksize is set to, say, 1 MB ... and
you've got 20 threads for handling connections, you're looking at a nsd
footprint of at least 20
On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 21:33, John Shafto wrote:
I was running nsd v.3.4.2 on a fairly active website
(FreeBSD 4.x os) for a few weeks and had some
trouble with the nsd process growing. I was restarting
the process every few days as it grew to 40-60Mb.
40-60MB is nothing. I'd
[Dossy]
40-60MB is nothing. I'd worry if your nsd grows beyond 2GB.
Doing what?
Just about anything. If your stacksize is set to, say, 1 MB ... and
you've got 20 threads for handling connections, you're looking at a nsd
footprint of at least 20 MB. 40-60 MB is very reasonable for a
19 matches
Mail list logo
