Re: still have named memory leak

2014-12-13 Thread Kevin Oberman
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Mukund Sivaraman m...@isc.org wrote: Hi Len On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 09:52:23AM -0600, lcon...@go2france.com wrote: binary upgraded Freebsd 10 to Freebsd 10.1 named 9.10.1, compiled from source at named start, 305 MB memory after several hours of

RE: still have named memory leak

2014-12-13 Thread Frank Bulk
To: Mukund Sivaraman Cc: bind-users@lists.isc.org Subject: Re: still have named memory leak On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Mukund Sivaraman m...@isc.org mailto:m...@isc.org wrote: Hi Len On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 09:52:23AM -0600, lcon...@go2france.com mailto:lcon...@go2france.com wrote: binary

still have named memory leak

2014-12-12 Thread lconrad
binary upgraded Freebsd 10 to Freebsd 10.1 named 9.10.1, compiled from source at named start, 305 MB memory after several hours of running named is approaching 800 MB. I'm sure after a couple of days, as before, it will head towards 2000 MB suggestions? this is a recursive only NS, about

Re: still have named memory leak

2014-12-12 Thread Mukund Sivaraman
Hi Len On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 09:52:23AM -0600, lcon...@go2france.com wrote: binary upgraded Freebsd 10 to Freebsd 10.1 named 9.10.1, compiled from source at named start, 305 MB memory after several hours of running named is approaching 800 MB. I'm sure after a couple of days, as

Re: still have named memory leak

2014-12-12 Thread lconrad
On Friday 12/12/2014 at 10:12 am, Mukund Sivaraman wrote: Hi Len On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 09:52:23AM -0600, lcon...@go2france.com wrote: binary upgraded Freebsd 10 to Freebsd 10.1 named 9.10.1, compiled from source at named start, 305 MB memory after several hours of running named is