Thanks for getting back with the "solution". You might want to give that bugzilla entry a jolt, it's been stagnating since last year. :-) Lucian -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Boris Epstein" <borepstein at gmail.com> > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> > Sent: Wednesday, 14 January, 2015 18:47:17 > Subject: Re: [CentOS] DJBDNS: very weird dnscache issue > Lucian, > > So far here is the best we could find out: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1084747 > > Testing to see if this is the solution; so far it seems to be. > > Cheers, > > Boris. > > > On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Nux! <nux at li.nux.ro> wrote: > >> Use BIND. How the times have changed. :-) >> >> PS: I'm also curious for a solution.. for when djbnostalgia hits me. >> >> Lucian >> >> -- >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! >> >> Nux! >> www.nux.ro >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Boris Epstein" <borepstein at gmail.com> >> > To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> >> > Sent: Tuesday, 13 January, 2015 15:53:28 >> > Subject: [CentOS] DJBDNS: very weird dnscache issue >> >> > Hello all, >> > >> > We have put a DNS server online running DJBDNS v1.06 >> > (ndjbdns-1.06-1.el6.x86_64) on a 64-bit CentOS 6.6 server. We have done >> > some limited testing on the machine which it passed - i.e., dnscache was >> > talking to tinydns, the queries went through fine, etc. >> > >> > As soon as we put it online subjecting it to live load the following >> > happened: >> > >> > 1) Within a short time period (about a minute) the dnscache process >> reached >> > the CPU utilisation level of 100%. >> > >> > 2) The process would then die reporting the following message to the log: >> > >> > dnscache: BUG: out of in progress slots >> > >> > NOTE: Random sampling indicates that at no point sampled did the load >> > exceed 200 requests per second. In tests conducted earlier the DNS server >> > successfully demonstrated speeds in tens of thousands of requests per >> > second. >> > >> > We then proceeded to edit the following parameters in the dnscache.conf >> as >> > they seemed to be the only ones that seemed relevant: DATALIMIT and >> > CACHESIZE. They are described as limints (in bytes) on the total data >> > memory allocation and cache, default values are 80000000 and 50000000 >> > respectively. >> > >> > Playing with these demonstrated some highly counterintuitive results: >> > >> > 1) Setting the values lower (say, an order of magnitude lower) made the >> > dnscache process run longer. >> > >> > 2) Shortening the relative gap between the two values (for instance, >> > setting DATALIMIT at 52000 and CACHE at 50000) made it run for about an >> > hour vs about 1 minute, load seeming to be about the same. >> > >> > 3) Running it with DATALIMIT not set was possible though it eventually >> > failed anyways. >> > >> > 4) Running it with CACHESIZE not set was not possible at all. >> > >> > So the issue is currently still not resolved and we are stuck. >> > >> > Any advice will be much appreciated. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > >> > Boris. >> > _______________________________________________ >> > CentOS mailing list >> > CentOS at centos.org >> > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >> _______________________________________________ >> CentOS mailing list >> CentOS at centos.org >> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >> > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos