On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 10:00:03AM +0000, Justin Mason wrote: > > Daryl C. W. O'Shea writes: > > The long standing bottleneck (for net-enabled mass-checks) in my > > otherwise fast mass-check cluster is Bind. It seems that it simply > > cannot handle the load of a dozen or so cores worth of mass-check > > processes. 475 kmsgs/hr non-net versus 70 kmsgs/hr net-enabled is > > unacceptable. > > > > What are people using for a high capacity DNS recursive resolver... > > which hopefully includes cache capabilities? > > well, I don't have a mass-check cluster ;) > > What about multiple binds, one per machine?
I think multiple nameservers make it even worse. I don't see why a single decend nameserver wouldn't work for a _tiny_ load like this. Bind even works on multiple cores. We are missing the crucial details.. Are all queries to local mirrors? Are concurrent processes raised accordingly when using net-enabled? You have to take in account the DNS delay that's slowing you down. Not to mention Net::DNS is a resource pig.
