Re: File Descriptor limit and malfunction bind

2010-01-07 Thread JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
At Tue, 05 Jan 2010 10:36:27 +0200, Imri Zvik im...@inter.net.il wrote: i have a high load DNS server running bind 9.4.3 on RH - yesterday we experienced a problem with the bind  (the bind froze) , and when looking at the logs i saw the following error : named error: socket: file

Re: File Descriptor limit and malfunction bind

2010-01-05 Thread Imri Zvik
On Sunday 03 January 2010 16:36:06 Ram Akuka wrote: i have a high load DNS server running bind 9.4.3 on RH - yesterday we experienced a problem with the bind  (the bind froze) , and when looking at the logs i saw the following error : named error: socket: file descriptor exceeds limit

Re: File Descriptor limit and malfunction bind

2010-01-05 Thread Kevin Darcy
Shumon Huque wrote: On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 01:43:52PM -0500, Kevin Darcy wrote: named seems to use, by default, the OS hard limit on file descriptors, even though the ARM says The default is |unlimited|. . When it starts up as superuser, in theory it should be able to set both the hard and

Re: File Descriptor limit and malfunction bind

2010-01-04 Thread Kevin Darcy
What's your hard limit (ulimit -n -H)? named seems to use, by default, the OS hard limit on file descriptors, even though the ARM says The default is |unlimited|. . When it starts up as superuser, in theory it should be able to set both the hard and soft limit to infinity, but it doesn't

Re: File Descriptor limit and malfunction bind

2010-01-04 Thread Shumon Huque
On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 01:43:52PM -0500, Kevin Darcy wrote: named seems to use, by default, the OS hard limit on file descriptors, even though the ARM says The default is |unlimited|. . When it starts up as superuser, in theory it should be able to set both the hard and soft limit to