On 08/04/2010 01:36 PM, Nuno Nunes wrote: > Hello all, > > > I've gone through the last few months of the ML, up until the > announcement of the release of 3.2.1, and didn't find any reference to > this bug I'm apparently seeing, so I'm reporting this to you all for > help. > > I work at an ISP where we have a number of servers running PowerDNS > Resolver 3.2.1 as our customer-facing resolvers. > > We have had this setup for a few months now and sometimes a weird thing > happens (and no, I can't reproduce it in any deterministic way and it > only happens sometimes): when the TTL for a record of a given zone > expires and a new request comes in for it, some of the caches on the > farm go out and get the new information, but some others just seem to > ignore the TTL and stick with the old data forever. > This is most notable when a zone changes name servers and the owner of > the zone comes complaining to us that we still have the old data, even > after the appropriate amount of time has elapsed for it to have been > refreshed (and on these cases we typically observe this behaviour on NS > records, but we have observed it on A records also, for example). > Now we have had this happen at least three times over the last months > and we've tried to narrow it down to a specific set of circumstances, > but we haven't been able to really find a pattern. > What we do know is that every time this happens, some of the servers > behave correctly (TTL expires => get new data) and others don't. And > when that happens not even `rec_control wipe-cache` will work. > The servers are all identical (same HW, same OS and same SW). > > Has anyone else observed something like this before? Is it a known bug > and I just failed to find it being discussed? More importantly: is there > a fix for this behaviour?
Indeed. I saw the exact same thing, like 3 or 4 times in the last couple of months, with the exact same simptoms. Also at an ISP, customers complaining about old records after changing nameservers for a domain. Couldn't find the cause either, although I did not investigate in detail. Good to know I'm not crazy ;) I have to look into it next time this pops up with a domain. I have no further details unfortunately. I don't think it came up until now on the list, it's pretty rare and vague to get good details on the problem. -- Imre Gergely Yahoo!: gergelyimre | ICQ#: 101510959 MSN: gergely_imre | GoogleTalk: gergelyimre gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 0x34525305 _______________________________________________ Pdns-users mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/pdns-users
