[Raw Msg Headers][Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Router dumping core
> > > > I'm just wondering if anyone has been experiencing their router
> > > >process dumping core. I am running version 2.90-940626 on a Sparc LX,
> > > >sunos 4.1.3_U1 ... Zmailer was compiled with gcc 2.5.8 ..
> > I am seeing it too, but beats me what is up..
> > (careless string-pointers somewhere ?) Maybe this night..
> > Maybe a problem with rfc822.ssl -- use the old version ?
> Which version, the original 2.2 ? or one of your intermediates. BTW,
> just happened again ... I get several core file in the top level
> /var/spool/postoffice it looks like only three of the router deamons
> dumped core ?
My lattest dump, of course (when I talk about cores, when others
say, I don't know..)
Figuring which router dumps core is "a bit" difficult, thus
the configuration script does its own tricks on getting unique
id for the file. Maybe not the best way to do it, but livable..
Anyway, I got HUGE logs into $LOGDIR/router when the script
left cores into spool... Also the idle loop spinned considerable
times. (Ok, a bit of creativity within rd_stability() -routine
could do the same as the scrips do now when they move the cores
away, but it would be less flexible..)
> Question, it seems that when running 2.2, the router processes each
> consumed about equal CPU, even over the long haul, now there are bit
> differences between them ....
Yes, Though most likely that is due to differing kind of jobs
those routers have gotten over their life-time. They do race
asynchronously, after all..
Here at UTU.FI the typical job-mix resolves easily, thus their
(4 routers) memory images are about identical in size, and
CPU-times are the same.
At NIC.FUNET.FI two routers have handled postings to long lists
and those have huge core-sizes (30MB), one has medium size core,
and the fourth one is 1M.. CPU times vary from 45 sec to 100 sec
and don't depend upon core-size. When one routes long list, others
can spend time spinning small quick jobs..
> Looks like I have to keep a close eye on things ...
I have some ideas about handling tmalloc()ed memory, lets see
if I can get some order out of it. Basically the intention is
to let all non-local objects to ride on "ring 1", and rest to
alloc (and release) rings with higher orders when a recursion
is used. Bringing return data from recursion level to the
caller level does need some creative copying, though.
I think there can be practically infinite ( > 100 ) number of
levels of tmalloc() rings. That should handle all our needed
PS: My CNAME recursion blocker was coded in a year or so ago..
Could you see, why sometimes router can route, but SMTP
doesn't find MXes, nor As ? Wierd, isn't it ?