Jeremy,
I saw this on Thursday, but I also saw that Mark had answered you and I
had to focus on $REAL_LIFE so sorry for the delay.
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
The following is a reproducible problem on a couple of our DNS servers:
(one running 6.2-STABLE, one running 7.0-PRERELEASE):
pid 52308 (named), uid 53: exited on signal 6
Oct 18 12:10:21 anubis named[52308]:
/usr/src/lib/bind/isc/../../../contrib/bind9/lib/isc/task.c:1238:
INSIST((((manager->tasks).head == ((void *)0)) ? isc_boolean_true :
isc_boolean_false)) failed
Oct 18 12:10:21 anubis named[52308]: exiting (due to assertion failure)
The problem only occurs when using "/etc/rc.d/named restart". Doing a
manual "/etc/rc.d/named stop" then "/etc/rc.d/named start" does not
induce the problem.
I'm currently working on some improvements to the rc.d/named script that
should help with that issue (unrelated to the bug Mark mentioned in BIND
9.3.4).
There was one random Internet user who posted about the same issue:
http://forums.devshed.com/dns-36/weird-loggs-470845.html
There's nothing bizarre about our BIND configuration on these boxes.
I've re-written it (by hand) a couple times hoping it might be some
syntax problem or other oddity, but it doesn't appear to be. We're not
chrooting,
You probably should be. :) You're correct in thinking that it's not a
factor for this issue though.
and there's no jails. Only thing "non-standard" in rc.conf that's
named-related is named_flags="-4".
Yeah, that's both harmless and common.
Both boxes exhibiting this problem are running on identical hardware
(C2Ds, same memory amount, etc.), with an SMP kernel. The 7.0 box uses
the ULE scheduler, while the 6.2 box uses the 4BSD scheduler. I mention
this because the master server (running 6.2-STABLE on different
hardware, non-SMP kernel, single-core P4 CPU) uses CPUTYPE?=prescott and
does not have this problem.
If you're running on 6.x and/or BIND 9.3.x you should definitely not use
threads, and your idea of using -n1 is probably a good idea as well (even
if the bug were not present).
I saw your followup to this post so I'm a little unclear as to what
hardware we're talking about, but if you're using a dual core or SMP
machine I strongly encourage you to upgrade to 7.0 and BIND 9.4.1-P1. Both
new versions have significant improvements in how they handle threads, and
Kris has done some great work profiling that combination and shown that it
significantly outperforms 6.2 and 9.3.x.
I can't provide access to these boxes, but I can provide the
configuration files and zones (there are not many) to those I trust
(dougb@ that means you :) ).
Heh, thanks.
hth,
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
