Re: Unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE

2007-06-14 Thread Marc G. Fournier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 - --On Wednesday, June 13, 2007 20:15:56 +0200 Ulrich Spoerlein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: was your leak a kernel leak or a user leak (if it actually makes a difference). I don't know ... it was caused by an application, but nothing was freed up

Re: Unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE

2007-06-14 Thread Alexandre Biancalana
On 6/14/07, Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know ... it was caused by an application, but nothing was freed up after the application was stop'd ... In my case the sockets are closed only if I stop the samba processes. When I just changed the connection mode from Unix Socket

Re: Unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE

2007-06-14 Thread Marc G. Fournier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 - --On Thursday, June 14, 2007 14:03:27 -0300 Alexandre Biancalana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/14/07, Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know ... it was caused by an application, but nothing was freed up after the application

Re: Unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE

2007-06-14 Thread Alexandre Biancalana
On 6/14/07, Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 - --On Thursday, June 14, 2007 14:03:27 -0300 Alexandre Biancalana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/14/07, Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know ... it was caused by an

Unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE

2007-06-13 Thread Ulrich Spoerlein
Hi, as you are aware, there is a unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE, which AFAIK is not yet fully fixed. I wanted to ask about the status or some possible fixes, as I know a way to reproduce the problem in a matter of minutes. We are running Cyrus and Postfix with the user DB in OpenLDAP

Re: Unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE

2007-06-13 Thread Ivan Voras
Ulrich Spoerlein wrote: Hi, as you are aware, there is a unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE, which AFAIK is not yet fully fixed. We are running Cyrus and Postfix with the user DB in OpenLDAP. When using ldapi://%2fvar%2frun%2fopenldap%2fldapi/ as a connection URL for both Postfix' user

Re: Unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE

2007-06-13 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 04:22:45PM +0200, Ulrich Spoerlein wrote: Hi, as you are aware, there is a unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE, which AFAIK is not yet fully fixed. I wanted to ask about the status or some possible fixes, as I know a way to reproduce the problem in a matter

Re: Unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE

2007-06-13 Thread Ronald Klop
On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 16:22:45 +0200, Ulrich Spoerlein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, as you are aware, there is a unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE, which AFAIK is not yet fully fixed. I wanted to ask about the status or some possible fixes, as I know a way to reproduce the problem

Re Unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE

2007-06-13 Thread Ulrich Spoerlein
On 6/13/07, Ivan Voras [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can you perhaps isolate the bug / give more information on it? I'm asking because I'm currently using an application with unix domain sockets in production wich handles lots of connects/disconnects per second and it doesn't seem to show leakage.

Re: Unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE

2007-06-13 Thread Marc G. Fournier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 - --On Wednesday, June 13, 2007 09:17:36 -0700 Jeremy Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've seen this kind of problem with domain sockets (at least on Linux with a multi-use tool called busybox) where on error conditions the code never

Re: Unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE

2007-06-13 Thread Ulrich Spoerlein
Marc G. Fournier wrote: 'k, just to ring in here ... I can definitely attest to there being a leak here, as it was me that was originally burned by it ... in my case, I eventually was able to isolate which VPS/jail was causing it and haven't run it since, but was never able to determine

Re: Unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE

2007-06-13 Thread Jeremy Chadwick
On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 08:15:56PM +0200, Ulrich Spoerlein wrote: I wonder though: maxfilesperproc is roughly 12k, but lsof needs to only count 2.5k lines of slapd output when the limit is hit. Is there a better way to check, how much fds/resources are open by a certain process? sockstat is

Re: Unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE

2007-06-13 Thread Alexandre Biancalana
On 6/13/07, Ulrich Spoerlein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, as you are aware, there is a unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE, which AFAIK is not yet fully fixed. I wanted to ask about the status or some possible fixes, as I know a way to reproduce the problem in a matter of minutes. We

Re: Unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE

2007-06-13 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* Alexandre Biancalana [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070613 12:40] wrote: On 6/13/07, Ulrich Spoerlein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, as you are aware, there is a unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE, which AFAIK is not yet fully fixed. I wanted to ask about the status or some possible fixes, as I

Re: Unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE

2007-06-13 Thread Alexandre Biancalana
On 6/13/07, Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would advise running truss or ktrace against the process to see if it's actually attempting to close the descriptor. this would explain if the leak is in the application, or maybe libc/kernel. -- - Alfred Perlstein Hi ! I change