Re: max-cache-size rule of thumb?

[David Forrest]

On Mon, 18 Apr 2011, Dennis Perisa wrote:


Hi all,

Is there a rule of thumb when setting max-cache-size?  e.g. max physical
memory * 0.4

Is there even a need to set max-cache-size on a server with plenty of memory
(10GB) running only BIND?

Regards
Dennis



Dennis, since getting the answers from cache is usually faster (and 
therefore more efficient) than recursing, I think the question is really 
what is the definition of plenty of memory.  If bind's performance is 
hindered because of available memory then a limit on the cache size may be 
warranted, as also an increase of memory may be.  In the example, a 
max-cache-size of .4*10GB leaves a residual pool that far exceeds BIND's 
requirements.  The answer must be determined empirically;  If performance 
is adversely affected then (and only then) limit the cache size .


Dave

--
David Forrest 
Maple Park Development Corporation

St. Louis, Missouri
___
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

Re: max-cache-size rule of thumb?

[Eivind Olsen]

Dennis Perisa wrote:
 Is there a rule of thumb when setting max-cache-size?  e.g. max physical
 memory * 0.4
 Is there even a need to set max-cache-size on a server with plenty of
 memory
 (10GB) running only BIND?

I'd normally not recommend to limit the cache size - with normal use, it
should stabilize on some amount by itself, based on your usage patterns.
Memory is fairly cheap these days, too.

Regards
Eivind Olsen


___
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users