BIND 9.3.2 on FreeBSD 6.1 out of control

[Gushi]

last pid: 75482;  load averages:  1.07,  1.02,  1.00
                                    up 8+21:17:23  14:40:02
27 processes:  2 running, 25 sleeping
CPU states: 85.6% user,  0.0% nice, 12.5% system,  1.9% interrupt,
0.0% idle
Mem: 169M Active, 186M Inact, 104M Wired, 112M Buf, 1544M Free
Swap: 967M Total, 967M Free

  PID USERNAME PRI NICE   SIZE    RES STATE    TIME   WCPU    CPU
COMMAND
  303 bind     125    0   162M   162M RUN     38.0H 93.41% 93.41% named

The above is with max-cache-size 2000000;

There is still a problem here.

-Dan


Thomas Schulz wrote:
> In article <enub7h$2v57$1 at sf1.isc.org>, patrick  <gibblertron at gmail.com> wrote:
> >Seems to me like this shouldn't take all that long though, should it?
> >What's happening with me is that when it hits the max_cache_size, it
> >consumes the CPU indefinitely. The only way to get it to settle down
> >is to kill the process and restart it.
> >
> >Out of curiosity, do most people set max_cache_size? If not, how is
> >BIND not indefinitely growing? If they do, how big is it usually set?
> >I'm getting the impression that most people are not experiencing the
> >same problems as me, but I have no idea what I could be doing wrong
> >because I'm not sure how everyone else has configured their servers.
> >My configuration file hasn't changed too much since upgrading from
> >BIND 8.
>
> I think that many if not most people do not set max_cache_size.  If you
> have enough memory and have limits set high enough that they never hit,
> bind will reach a high but stable memory usage after running several
> days.
>
> >Patrick
> >
> >On 1/7/07, Mark Andrews <Mark_Andrews at isc.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> > So is no one else experiencing this sudden surge in CPU usage when
> >> > BIND 9 hits its max cache size?
> >>
> >>         When the cache hits it's max size it trigger's a cleaning
> >>         pass which randomly removes 25% of the RRset's in the cache
> >>         as well as cleaning those that have expired.  That will
> >>         take some cpu usage.
> >>
> >>         At some point it would be nice to make the overmemory removal
> >>         be LRU based rather than random.
> >>
> >>         Mark
> >>
> >> > On 1/3/07, patrick <gibblertron at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > But when it reaches that limit, is there any reason why the named
> >> > > process starts eating up all CPU time? The memory size, I can handle
> >> > > (and control) -- it's the unexplained CPU usage that concerns me.
> >> > >
> >> > > This server is a master for 143 domains, and will likely take on many
> >> > > more. Is there a way I can see what's in the cache? I'd just like to
> >> > > get an idea of how much memory each record takes up so I can do some
> >> > > math for future planning on resource requirements.
> >> > >
> >> > > Patrick
> >> --
> >> Mark Andrews, ISC
> >> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> >> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews at isc.org
> >>
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Tom Schulz
> schulz at adi.com