I see there is a "files" directive for named.conf - does it override/set the OS files limit, or if I set it to 5000, and the OS says 256, am I stuck at 256?
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Todd <[email protected]> wrote: > My apologies - that was silly of me. > > The servers in question are running a mix of BIND versions .. 9.2.3, > 9.2.4, 9.3.2, 9.3.4, 9.4.1, 9.4.2-p2, the majority are 9.3.4 and > 9.4.2-P2 > > Cheers. > > > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 2:32 PM, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 > <[email protected]> wrote: >> At Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:14:27 -0500, >> Todd <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> We ran into an issue this morning with some caching DNS servers. One >>> of the zones we heavily rely on was having DNS issues, which appears >>> to have been causing very slow responses to us. The servers in >>> question handle about 500queries/second. >>> >>> These particular servers are configured with "recursive-clients 5000", >>> which we thought would be sufficient. However, before we even reached >>> 5000, the server started boinking because of "socket: too many open >>> file descriptors" errors in syslog. >>> >>> So, the question is, do we need a 1:1 mapping of fle descriptors to >>> max queries, + overhead for named? From reading, I see that a socket >>> uses a file descriptor, so my assumption is yes, but I wanted to check >>> with Those Who Are Wiser Than I before I write a change ticket to get >>> these things fixed. >>> >>> If I do need to allow more file descriptors, what is the best method >>> to ensure that the named process has an appropriate number? >> >> Before answering the questions: which version of BIND (you didn't even >> say it was a BIND, but I guess it is for the obvious reason:-) are you >> using? >> >> --- >> JINMEI, Tatuya >> Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. >> > _______________________________________________ bind-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
