On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 03:35:37PM +, Kelly Garrett wrote:
Does anyone know how to build a version of the kernel that either
does no disk
cacheing (we have very fast RAID processors and SCSI disks on the
machine) or
limit the amount of cache that the system will allocate for disk?
: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 9:09 PM
To: Garrett, Kelly
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: rsync 2.6.0 - suspected memory leak bug
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 02:45:47PM -0700, Garrett, Kelly wrote:
After every rsync transfer there is a large amount of memory that is
not freed up.
Your report sounds
will not run with the newer versions of RH
yet, so I may have to go to a Sun solution.
Cheers
Kelly
-Original Message-
From: Wayne Davison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 9:09 PM
To: Garrett, Kelly
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: rsync 2.6.0 - suspected memory leak
Wayne Davison wayned at samba.org writes:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 06:16:34PM -0800, jw schultz wrote:
As far as i can tell Under inetd each connection should get
independant rsync process(es) which all exit so there would be no
rsync processes running unless there is an active
Jim Salter jim at jrssystems.net writes:
IANALG (I Am Not A Linux Guy - FreeBSD is my *nix of choice), but could
this possibly be related to the mem:remap Linux kernel bug that was
recently discovered?
Jim Salter
It just might have something to do with this. I have come to the
What kernel are you using, and if it's not at least 2.4.x, have you
considered simply trying a newer kernel?
Jim Salter jim at jrssystems.net writes:
IANALG (I Am Not A Linux Guy - FreeBSD is my *nix of choice), but could
this possibly be related to the mem:remap Linux kernel bug that was
Jim Salter jim at jrssystems.net writes:
What kernel are you using, and if it's not at least 2.4.x, have you
considered simply trying a newer kernel?
Jim Salter jim at jrssystems.net writes:
IANALG (I Am Not A Linux Guy - FreeBSD is my *nix of choice), but could
this possibly
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 03:35:37PM +, Kelly Garrett wrote:
Wayne Davison wayned at samba.org writes:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 06:16:34PM -0800, jw schultz wrote:
As far as i can tell Under inetd each connection should get
independant rsync process(es) which all exit so there would
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 02:45:47PM -0700, Garrett, Kelly wrote:
After every rsync transfer there is a large amount of memory that is
not freed up.
Your report sounds like you're not talking about process size, but a
free-memory report from something like top. If so, Linux uses unused
memory as
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 06:09:09PM -0800, Wayne Davison wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 02:45:47PM -0700, Garrett, Kelly wrote:
After every rsync transfer there is a large amount of memory that is
not freed up.
Your report sounds like you're not talking about process size, but a
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 06:16:34PM -0800, jw schultz wrote:
As far as i can tell Under inetd each connection should get
independant rsync process(es) which all exit so there would be no
rsync processes running unless there is an active connection.
Yes, that's my understanding as well. He also
11 matches
Mail list logo
