This is a known issue. The basic memory consumption model is as follows:
Scan Daemon Parent - Memory consumed to read in pertinent script info Amount of memory consumed directly proportional to the # of scripts you have. Scan Task (child of Scan Daemon) - one forked for each connection opened to service a client request. Memory from parent would ideally be in a "copy-on-write" mode, but it appears that all of the parent's memory is copied, probably due to memory structure changes as the parent gets ready to begin running a scan (building deps? setting other flags not previously set?). Scan-IP (child of Scan Task) - one forked for each IP address that is to be scanned. Script Execution (child of Scan-IP) - one forked for each new script. Again, has copy-on-write memory, so while 'ps' will show high memory usage, an overall system view of memory consumption shows only marginal increase in memory usage for most scripts. If we take a typical scan request of, say, a class C network, your optimimum platform memory consumption will be in a model where a client connects up to the scanner, and passes all IP addresses to be scanned in a single request. If we were to allow all IP addresses to be scanned simultaneously, we would have a total of 1+1+ConcIP+256*ConScript processes running, where ConcIP is the Concurrent # of IPs being tested, and ConScript is the concurrent # of scripts executed at any one time against a given IP. The worst scenario is to have a separate client connection to the scanner for each IP to be tested, in which case we would have 1+ConcIP+ConcIP+256*ConScript. Since the memory consumption is primarily on the first 3 values, it becomes important to put multiple targets into a single request (i.e. minimize client to scanner daemon connections) so as to minimize memory usage. Thomas On 28/11/12 10:09 AM, Jan-Christopher Brand wrote: > Hi, > > > > I saw that with each task started, the OpenVAS-Scanner needs about 7mb > more memory. After I updated to the newest version from trunk - because > I’ve seen something about fixed memory-leeks - it got better, but still > each start of a task adds 3,2mb memory usage to the scanner. Is this a > known behavior? And will this be fixed? I’m starting thousands of tasks > after each other, so the 3,2mb are quite much ;-) > > > > Mit freundlichen Grüßen, > > > > Jan-Christopher Brand > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Openvas-devel mailing list > Openvas-devel@wald.intevation.org > https://lists.wald.intevation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openvas-devel _______________________________________________ Openvas-devel mailing list Openvas-devel@wald.intevation.org https://lists.wald.intevation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openvas-devel
