Hi Bert,
bert hubert wrote:
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 02:24:03PM +0100, Simon Bedford wrote:
I then just upgraded the version to our patched version of 3.2 but
without specifying our usual 4 threads and the response times went
up on the graphing straight away, upping the number of threads makes
Simon Bedford wrote:
Hi Bert,
Is there any update on this bug, interested to know if you have found
the root cause of it...
Also I have just upgraded one of our internal servers from Debian Etch
and pdns-recursor-3.1.7-2 to Debian Lenny and the same patched version
of pdns-recursor-3.2
sense of *why* it is happening.
We'll keep you posted.
Once this is solved, 3.3 will be released.
Bert
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 04:11:35PM +0100, Simon Bedford wrote:
Hi Christian,
Have we had any joy in replicating this issue or highlighting the
root cause of the issue?
Thanks
Simon
Hi Christian,
We are running a mixture of Debian Etch and Debian Lenny, we get the source
tarball from your website and have then been patching from the appropriate
changeset and then creating a static .deb package. the only thing we change in
the process is the SEMI= flag in the rules file
Thanks Bert,
Appreciate you looking into this, would be nice to nail it once and for all.
Simon
From: bert.hub...@netherlabs.nl [bert.hub...@netherlabs.nl]
Sent: 22 June 2010 15:50
To: Simon Bedford
Cc: pdns-users@mailman.powerdns.com
Subject: Re: [Pdns-users
bert hubert wrote:
Simon,
the solution to your issue is almost certainly in
http://wiki.powerdns.com/trac/changeset/1640
Even though you do not see the log messages, I'm pretty sure this is it.
Bert
Morning,
I created and installed the package yesterday (with the following option
Morning Bert,
We had a crash on one of the upgraded servers over the weekend and as
suspected it happened around the default max tcp-clients, please see the
entry from my log below that was running to query the amount of clients :-
128
128
128
128
128
128
128
128
128
128
128
128
128
128
128
Bert, its now climbing and not seeming to close any clients on both
servers now, although one is much worse than the other, one is at 11 and
the other is at 108 tcp-clients at the moment.
Simon
Simon Bedford wrote:
Please see answers below :-
bert hubert wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11
bert hubert wrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 02:23:04PM +0100, Simon Bedford wrote:
It contains some other exciting stuff too, and it appears to be stable for
production use.
I have now built a static package and installed to 2 of the 8
servers after testing in isolation, they appear
Please see answers below :-
bert hubert wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:10:29AM +0100, Simon Bedford wrote:
I have been running the 'get tcp-clients' every 5 mins in cron on
both servers, one is very low 10 and fluctuates, the other is just
growing and growing and is currently at 55, hope
Simon,
There is now a 3.3 prerelease that contains all the stuff you'd need for
further trouble shooting.
Please find it on
http://svn.powerdns.com/snapshots/pdns-recursor-3.3-pre.tar.bz2
It contains some other exciting stuff too, and it appears to be stable for
production use.
Bert
On 30/05/2010 19:31, bert hubert wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:12:29AM +0100, Simon Bedford wrote:
This has happened a further twice in the last week, output sent off
list, please let me know if you need any further information.
Simon,
Could you apply this patch:
http
On 30/05/2010 19:31, bert hubert wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:12:29AM +0100, Simon Bedford wrote:
This has happened a further twice in the last week, output sent off
list, please let me know if you need any further information.
Simon,
Could you apply this patch:
http
Simon,
Could you apply this patch:
http://wiki.powerdns.com/trac/changeset/1623
And periodically run 'rec_control get tcp-clients' ?
Hi Bert, I have just returned from annual leave and began to look into
this earlier but when I download the latest source from your website and
put the
Simon,
Could you apply this patch:
http://wiki.powerdns.com/trac/changeset/1623
And periodically run 'rec_control get tcp-clients' ?
Hi Bert, I have just returned from annual leave and began to look into
this earlier but when I download the latest source from your website and
put the
Simon Bedford wrote:
bert hubert wrote:
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 05:20:18PM +0100, Simon Bedford wrote:
It has happened again over the weekend and a simple restart fixed the issue.
Simon,
We have a new theory why this might be happening, to verify, if the issue
ever occcurs again, can you run
bert hubert wrote:
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 05:20:18PM +0100, Simon Bedford wrote:
It has happened again over the weekend and a simple restart fixed the issue.
Simon,
We have a new theory why this might be happening, to verify, if the issue
ever occcurs again, can you run:
$ netstat
bert hubert wrote:
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 05:37:10PM +0100, Simon Bedford wrote:
How many TCP/IP queries do you see per second, roughly? A quick run of
rec_control should dig this up.
date;rec_control get tcp-questions
Tue May 4 17:34:22 BST 2010
79371
date;rec_control get tcp-questions
Tue
Simon Bedford wrote:
Laurent Papier wrote:
Le Wed, 31 Mar 2010 20:42:33 +0200
bert hubert bert.hub...@netherlabs.nl écrit:
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 03:09:08PM +0100, Simon Bedford wrote:
A quick update - I've traced down an issue that may have been causing this.
Would you be interested
Please see answers below, thanks.
bert hubert wrote:
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 05:04:51PM +0100, Simon Bedford wrote:
We created a patched version in the end and rolled to one server
back on the 8th April, no fault seen since and now rolled to the
entire platform as of today, looking good.
We
Laurent Papier wrote:
Le Wed, 31 Mar 2010 20:42:33 +0200
bert hubert bert.hub...@netherlabs.nl écrit:
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 03:09:08PM +0100, Simon Bedford wrote:
A quick update - I've traced down an issue that may have been causing this.
Would you be interested in testing this small patch
bert hubert wrote:
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 03:09:08PM +0100, Simon Bedford wrote:
A quick update - I've traced down an issue that may have been causing this.
Would you be interested in testing this small patch?
I can help test this patch Bert.
It can be found on:
http://wiki.powerdns.com
Hi Bert,
We have one of the instances on our non live server happening at the
moment so I have not restarted it as yet, I have performed the following
on it and recorded the responses :-
UDP REQUEST
ptn-cdns03:/usr/local/nagios/libexec# dig google.com @212.159.6.117 any
; DiG 9.5.1-P3
bert hubert wrote:
A quick update - I've traced down an issue that may have been causing this.
Would you be interested in testing this small patch?
Bert
I can help test this patch Bert.
Simon
___
Pdns-users mailing list
Guys,
We have upgraded our customer caching name servers to pdns recursor 3.2
(which is working very well), this has now been running for 4 days but
in the last 24 hours we have seen the tcp listener stop answering
queries on 2 seperate servers. Our monitoring servers flag this up for
us
Stefan Schmidt wrote:
On 17.03.2010, at 12:37, Simon Bedford wrote:
This is what is causing the mystery for me, when its good its really good but
then response times go crazy at a random time, its dropped our customer
experience graphing from 99.987% to 89% (some of this will be the 3.1.7.2
Hi guys,
Apologies if this has been discussed before but as a new mailling list
user I have not seen anything.
We have been running recursor as a caching name server for a number of
months having moved from unbound, since this time we see good, in fact
quick DNS response time but then when
bert hubert wrote:
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 10:43:19AM +, Simon Bedford wrote:
We have been running recursor as a caching name server for a number
of months having moved from unbound, since this time we see good, in
fact quick DNS response time but then when running 3.1.7.1 and .2
and also
28 matches
Mail list logo
