Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 17:39:31 +0930 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Al Johnson <Al.Johnson@AJC.State.Net> Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Good nameserver system? Message-ID: <19971008173931.48096@lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <343B32D0.C2D8E9B9@AJC.State.Net>; from Al Johnson on Wed, Oct 08, 1997 at 02:14:24AM -0500 References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971008005417.11552C-100000@shell.futuresouth.com> <343B32D0.C2D8E9B9@AJC.State.Net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Oct 08, 1997 at 02:14:24AM -0500, Al Johnson wrote: > Matthew D. Fuller wrote: >> >> On Wed, 8 Oct 1997, Greg Lehey wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Oct 07, 1997 at 10:36:22PM -0400, Kris Kirby wrote: >>>> What would be a good system for making a nameserver? I'm guessing P-200 or >>>> better and PPro-200. This would be a FreeBSD system, running named or a >>>> faster nameserver. And a 500M-2GB disk cache. >>> >>> Are you planning to run a name server for a large network provider, >>> including a large number of secondary servers? Then you might be on >>> the right lines. I've always found that an old 386 with 8 MB of >>> memory does a pretty good job. My name server, the primary for my >>> domain, uses about 1 MB of data. In the last two days, it has used 22 >>> seconds of CPU time on a P5/133. > > Depending on many things Named can grow to be a real best. I work > on a DEC Alpha running the packaged Named (ya I know change to the > latest release of BIND) and last night when I checked on it, it was > consuming over 24MB of memory, virtually no disk space but way too > much memory. Fascinating. Could you dump the cache and see how much stuff it has in there? Greg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19971008173931.48096>