Re: error: socket: too many open file - DNS

This is a discussion on Re: error: socket: too many open file - DNS ; At Wed, 10 Sep 2008 06:29:22 -0700 (PDT), jyoung@trytel.com wrote: > I upgraded from BIND 9.2.4 to 9.5.0-P1 on a Solaris 10 SPARC server. [snip] > So I tried recompiling BIND with: > STD_CDEFINES='-DFD_SETSIZE=4096' ./configure --without-openssl > make > > ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Re: error: socket: too many open file

  1. Re: error: socket: too many open file

    At Wed, 10 Sep 2008 06:29:22 -0700 (PDT),
    jyoung@trytel.com wrote:

    > I upgraded from BIND 9.2.4 to 9.5.0-P1 on a Solaris 10 SPARC server.


    [snip]

    > So I tried recompiling BIND with:
    > STD_CDEFINES='-DFD_SETSIZE=4096' ./configure --without-openssl
    > make
    >
    > But still didn't work.


    Redefining FD_SETSIZE has no effect for P1. Use 9.5.0-P2 instead
    (with redefining FD_SETSIZE).

    I'd also suggest you use a "more conservative" version of P2, namely
    9.4.2-P2 or 9.3.5-P2 for migration from a 9.2. 9.5 has other
    ambitious changes than port randomization and is still in a 'point-0'
    release (i.e. 9.x.0), so it can be relatively less stable. In fact,
    we've recently fixed several bugs specific to 9.5. Unless you need
    features only available in 9.5, it's safer to stick to older versions,
    especially when introducing a very big change (i.e., port
    randomization).

    ---
    JINMEI, Tatuya
    Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.


  2. Re: error: socket: too many open file

    Thank you.

    Moving to 9.4.2-P2 seems to have cleared it up.


    "JINMEI Tatuya / ????" wrote in message
    news:gadusg$2e8p$1@sf1.isc.org...
    > At Wed, 10 Sep 2008 06:29:22 -0700 (PDT),
    > jyoung@trytel.com wrote:
    >
    >> I upgraded from BIND 9.2.4 to 9.5.0-P1 on a Solaris 10 SPARC server.

    >
    > [snip]
    >
    >> So I tried recompiling BIND with:
    >> STD_CDEFINES='-DFD_SETSIZE=4096' ./configure --without-openssl
    >> make
    >>
    >> But still didn't work.

    >
    > Redefining FD_SETSIZE has no effect for P1. Use 9.5.0-P2 instead
    > (with redefining FD_SETSIZE).
    >
    > I'd also suggest you use a "more conservative" version of P2, namely
    > 9.4.2-P2 or 9.3.5-P2 for migration from a 9.2. 9.5 has other
    > ambitious changes than port randomization and is still in a 'point-0'
    > release (i.e. 9.x.0), so it can be relatively less stable. In fact,
    > we've recently fixed several bugs specific to 9.5. Unless you need
    > features only available in 9.5, it's safer to stick to older versions,
    > especially when introducing a very big change (i.e., port
    > randomization).
    >
    > ---
    > JINMEI, Tatuya
    > Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.
    >





+ Reply to Thread