Discuss mailing list

[Alex Hanselka <alex AT opennicproject.org>]

On 4/10/2013 6:52 PM, mike wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 04/10/2013 03:48 PM, Alex M (Coyo) wrote:
> > speaking of bind and the unreasonable demands for ram it really
> > shouldn't need, does anyone here have some suggestions on
> > alternatives to bind?
> I never noticed BIND needing that much RAM, mind you all the boxes I
> have running BIND have more RAM than they probably need.
>
> In any case, I've never really had a good look under the covers of
> BIND, what's it doing with all that RAM?
>
> I could imagine where it is likely allocating some in-memory cache and
> things like this in the interest of performance, probably b-tree
> look-ups or some such. Those sort of things should probably be
> tweek-able, no?
Generally that is the reason why it uses so much RAM, bad tuning. In my 
case it would sometimes use too much RAM when there was a lot of 
traffic.  Day to day use was fine.  The most important settings I've set 
are the max cache size and the max recursors or whatever it is.  BIND by 
default seems to have an unlimited cache size which it stores in RAM.  
Needless to say, that can get unmanageable quite quickly in the event of 
a ddos or even just a lot of traffic.