Harry Moreau wrote:
Personally, I'm heartened to hear other people see leaks
Yea, me too! I have several systems where nsd 3.2+ad12 will slowly
consume memory until, if not restarted, it will crash the system. I had
been debating whether I should upgrade to 3.4 and see if it would help,
but
I was travelling yesterday, plus we are still fighting a few fires
since the 3.4 upgrade. To answer some of the questions/suggestions
people have posted:
1. Yes, I'm sure we're running 7.6 TCL. I ran into a few problems
with 8.X because we (intentionally) use poorly-constructed lists
in a
Try 3.3+ad13. It has a memory leak fix involving TSDs that I
back-ported from the 4.0 tree.
+-- On Oct 17, Janine Sisk said:
Yea, me too! I have several systems where nsd 3.2+ad12 will slowly
consume memory until, if not restarted, it will crash the system.
In glancing at the zippy code, it looks like it used a power-of-2
algorithm, so I figured it might cause less heap fragmentation. I
think that might be at least some of the problem. Does the standard
gnu/linux memory allocator handle fragmentation poorly/well?
+-- On Oct 17, Jim
+-- On Oct 17, Jim Wilcoxson said:
In glancing at the zippy code, it looks like it used a power-of-2
algorithm, so I figured it might cause less heap fragmentation. I
think that might be at least some of the problem. Does the standard
gnu/linux memory allocator handle fragmentation
Janine Sisk wrote:
Harry Moreau wrote:
Personally, I'm heartened to hear other people see leaks
Yea, me too! I have several systems where nsd 3.2+ad12 will slowly
consume memory until, if not restarted, it will crash the system. I had
been debating whether I should upgrade to 3.4 and see
Ok, I must have missed something, or might have been off of the cluetrain too long,
but what exactly is 'zippy'? I did a google search, but I was getting mostly 'zippy
the pinhead' and other weird stuff!
Anyone have an URL or explanation?
thanks,
--brett
On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 09:54:25 -0500
+-- On Oct 17, Brett Schwarz said:
Ok, I must have missed something, or might have been off of the cluetrain too long,
but what exactly is 'zippy'? I did a google search, but I was getting mostly 'zippy
the pinhead' and other weird stuff!
It's the -z flag to nsd.
zippy is the -z command line option to AS. It causes an AOL-designed
memory allocator to be used instead of the standard C library malloc.
Properties of zippy are that it has separate heaps for each thread
instead of a shared heap, thus avoiding the need to lock when
malloc'ing private thread
On 15 Oct, Jim Wilcoxson wrote:
After running 12 hours, we're seeing 28 nsd threads using 253MB. Does
that still seem reasonable for memory usage? Our baseline for this
server is 81MB right after the server starts with around 12 threads.
This server handled 762K requests today, total (less
On Tue, 16 Oct 2001, Dossy wrote:
On 2001.10.15, Jim Wilcoxson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After running 12 hours, we're seeing 28 nsd threads using 253MB. Does
That's 9.0 MB per thread. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
(What a world we live in, where 9MB in a thread -- a lightweight
After running 12 hours, we're seeing 28 nsd threads using 253MB. Does
that still seem reasonable for memory usage? Our baseline for this
server is 81MB right after the server starts with around 12 threads.
This server handled 762K requests today, total (less than that in the
12 hour period).
AS
We started 3.4 on a production server this morning and after 90 minutes it
looked like this:
Last login: Mon Oct 15 05:29:02 2001
No mail.
$ ps aux|grep nsd
nsadmin 32565 0.0 3.4 40424 36132 ? S 04:15 0:01 bin/nsd -i -t nsd
nsadmin 32568 0.0 3.4 40424 36132 ? S 04:15
Im curious why you dont just set minthreads = maxthreads at startup to reduce load. This server does not accumulate any data in ns_shares, so I'm trying
to figure out if this 45MB memory growth is reasonable for adding 6
additional threads. It doesn't seem reasonable. Anyone have
suggestions for
Im curious why you dont just set minthreads = maxthreads at startup to reduce load.
Because a) I don't know what a good value is for maxthreads, so
overestimate it; b) It will take longer to get the server to accept
requests when starting up.
nbsp; BRnbsp;/P/DIVgt;This server does not
After running 12 hours, we're seeing 28 nsd threads using 253MB. Does
that still seem reasonable for memory usage? Our baseline for this
server is 81MB right after the server starts with around 12 threads.
This server handled 762K requests today, total (less than that in the
12 hour period).
16 matches
Mail list logo
