How frequently Bind DNS can be updated?

[Vinod Kumar]

Hi,

First of all Thanks a lot for your response, Simon.

I have few more questions which came after going through your reply.

You mentioned about the log file which DNS maintains. I belive the =
number of operations that can take place per second is not only hold =
good for Update, but this holds good for all operations.

Correct me if Iam wrong, I belive we should be able to do some X number =
of transactions with DNS per second, and in your case this X is 10. The =
operation can include Query/Delete/Add.

Because I concluded that the problem Iam facing could be due to this =
restriction, as in my case there will be more than 10 operation =
happening, which includes Query,Addition and Deletion.

Is there any site or resource available which gives the details about =
such a performance figures about Bind DNS ?? If it is there, please pass =
that to me.

- vinod=20



-----Original Message-----
From: Simon Waters [mailto:Simon at wretched.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2003 4:35 PM
To: comp-protocols-dns-bind at isc.org
Subject: Re: How frequently Bind DNS can be updated?


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Vinod Kumar wrote:
>
> Iam suspecting whether "there is any restriction" from bind that DNS =
=3D
> shouldn't be updated very frequently ??

As far as I know BIND 9 is hardware limited in this respect.

I assume a bog standard PC, or similar, with one disk in is going to be
stressed if you maintain sending much more than 10's of updates a
second, purely because it logs, and by default adds data to the system
log, for each update, on one disk this will pretty quickly cause issues.

Have you got the log from when the problem occurred, as this should
record what updates happened.

I haven't seen anyone stressing out BIND via dynamic updates before, but
most people using dynamic update are using it to mimic NetBios names
over NetBeui using IP networking, and it wouldn't be hard to exceed the
reliability of the system being replaced. Most of the new Microsoft
stuff achieves reliability by perpetually reannouncing itself, which I
suppose is one way of doing things.

You haven't mentioned what is happening at slave servers.

You can limit the transaction log file size in BIND 9 which would appear
to impose a different possible mode of failing.

BIND 8 appears to have had extra limits related to IXFR, but I've never
seen the point in using BIND 8 for dynamic DNS work.

I would have thought the main point of SRV records weight field is you
don't need to send lots of DNS updates to balance load, so if it causes
a problem, don't do it as often.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQE/WxC9GFXfHI9FVgYRAnoBAJ0YzK3iJcHUVGwLzC4A11AHzcetpQCeOExU
tHPXYFwrem+0Mtik686DyLM=3D
=3DLejP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----