2009-02-12 19:26:25 |
jwestfall |
description |
Binary package hint: bind9
Hi
Even since the the 1:9.3.2-2ubuntu1.5 update to fix the source port randomization issue we have been seeing the following error on some of our busier name servers.
named[765]: socket.c:1616: INSIST(!sock->pending_recv) failed
named[765]: exiting (due to assertion failure)
From what I have gathered this issue is caused by having >1024 sockets being passed to select() and is suppose to be resolved by the following bug fix that went into 9.3.5-P2.
2406. [bug] Some operating systems have FD_SETSIZE set to a
low value by default, which can cause resource
exhaustion when many simultaneous connections are
open. Linux in particular makes it difficult to
increase this value. To use more sockets with
select(), set ISC_SOCKET_FDSETSIZE. Example:
STD_CDEFINES="-DISC_SOCKET_FDSETSIZE=4096" ./configure
(This should not be necessary in most cases, and
never for an authoritative-only server.) [RT #18328]
Would it be possible to either back port this fix or 9.3.5-P2 to dapper? |
Binary package hint: bind9
Hi
Ever since the the 1:9.3.2-2ubuntu1.5 update to fix the source port randomization issue we have been seeing the following error on some of our busier name servers.
named[765]: socket.c:1616: INSIST(!sock->pending_recv) failed
named[765]: exiting (due to assertion failure)
From what I have gathered this issue is caused by having >1024 sockets being passed to select() and is suppose to be resolved by the following bug fix that went into 9.3.5-P2.
2406. [bug] Some operating systems have FD_SETSIZE set to a
low value by default, which can cause resource
exhaustion when many simultaneous connections are
open. Linux in particular makes it difficult to
increase this value. To use more sockets with
select(), set ISC_SOCKET_FDSETSIZE. Example:
STD_CDEFINES="-DISC_SOCKET_FDSETSIZE=4096" ./configure
(This should not be necessary in most cases, and
never for an authoritative-only server.) [RT #18328]
Would it be possible to either back port this fix or 9.3.5-P2 to dapper? |
|