Jukka Pakkanen wrote:
> Upgraded to 9.5.0b1, and still the same problem. Every W2K or W2k3 server
> runs out of memory in a few days. No matter is it has 1 or 4 gigs of RAM,
> named process just grows and grows...

I doubt that upgrading is likely to make much difference in that
respect. Why did you install b1? That's a prerelease version of 9.5.0.
You shouldn't be running it now that 9.5.0 is released.

Note that named will grow its memory usage for about a week before it
stabilizes as it's caching a lot of DNS answers (both positive and
negative). One thing you might want to try is reducing the caching
limits. There are several things you can put into options:
max-cache-size nnn (default is 32M)
max-cache-ttl nnn (default is 7 days)
msc-ncache-ttl nnn (default is 3 hours)

I don't have any recommended numbers for you to put in there but you can
try and reduce them from the default values.

Note that based on the error you may have run out of Windows handles. If
you can monitor named, check the number of handles that it's using. This
is not shown by default in the task manager, you have to add the column
handle count in from the View->Select Columns menu. While you are at it
add the thread count. This will give an idea of whether there is a
handle problem. Also run netstat -aon and count the number of open
sockets by named.

> Jukka
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jukka Pakkanen"
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2008 11:49 AM
> Subject: Re: TCP queries fail - BIND 9.5.0 Windows Server 2003
>> Anyone here running 9.5.0 in a windows server??
>> Would be nice to know if everyone has the same problem with memory or not.
>> Jukka
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Vinny Abello"
>> To: "Jukka Pakkanen" ;
>> Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2008 11:43 AM
>> Subject: RE: TCP queries fail - BIND 9.5.0 Windows Server 2003
>> I hadn't noticed the memory usage, but it is possible. I think we have
>> around 2GB of RAM in these servers and they didn't appear to be responding
>> sluggishly as if they were swapping, so I'm not sure if it has anything to
>> do with the memory usage or not. I didn't feel like checking everything
>> under the sun while it wasn't working. I just wanted it to work so I
>> rolled back. It could be another resource issue like a handle or some
>> other resource leak I suppose.
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: bind-users-bounce@isc.org [mailto:bind-users-bounce@isc.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Jukka Pakkanen
>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 4:58 PM
>>> To: bind-users@isc.org
>>> Subject: Re: TCP queries fail - BIND 9.5.0 Windows Server 2003
>>> I wonder if this is the same problem we are experiencing after
>>> upgrading
>>> from 9.4.2 to 9.5.0. Win2K and W2K3. Do you see any memory problems
>>> with the
>>> named process when this happens? Our named grows until the memory and
>>> virtual memory is exhausted, and stops responding to queries.
>>> Restarting the
>>> service "solves" the problem. For few days.
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Vinny Abello"
>>> To:
>>> Cc:
>>> Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 6:37 AM
>>> Subject: RE: TCP queries fail - BIND 9.5.0 Windows Server 2003
>>> From: Danny Mayer [mayer@ntp.isc.org]
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:20 PM
>>> To: Vinny Abello
>>> Cc: bind-users@isc.org
>>> Subject: Re: TCP queries fail - BIND 9.5.0 Windows Server 2003
>>> Vinny Abello wrote:
>>>> I recently upgraded from BIND 9.4.2 on Windows Server 2003 to BIND
>>> 9.5.0. I was troubleshooting an issue today only to track it down to
>>> the
>>> fact that my name servers were no longer servicing requests on TCP port
>>> 53. UDP queries continued to work without any issues. On one server I
>>> noted in the logs:
>>>> 16-Jun-2008 13:27:30.687 general: .\socket.c:1934: unexpected error:
>>>> 16-Jun-2008 13:27:30.687 general: socket() failed: Invalid argument
>>>> All of my name servers would not respond to TCP queries during my
>>> tests. Eventually I restarted the BIND service on one of my name
>>> servers
>>> and everything came back to life and was working properly. I downgraded
>>> back to BIND 9.4.2 for the time being.
>>>> This appears to be a bug from what I can tell. When this was
>>> happening, if I telnet to port 53, the socket connects, but as soon as
>>> any data is sent, the socket is immediately closed. Again, a restart of
>>> BIND seemed to fix it. This is on multiple servers as well.
>>>> Has anyone else seen this? I'm cc'ing bind-bugs to file a bug report.
>>>> -Vinny
>>> What is going on when this happens? Are you doing zone transfers or
>>> something else? If zone transfers, is the from or two the server?
>>> Danny
>>> Well, the servers currently (unfortunately) are setup as both recursive
>>> resolvers in addition to being masters and slaves for over 1000 zones,
>>> so
>>> they're doing pretty much everything. The primary server that is the
>>> master
>>> for almost all the zones also experienced this problems as did the
>>> slaves.
>>> We were alerted to the problem when someone with an application that
>>> did TCP
>>> based DNS queries said they couldn't resolve anything.