Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
thread, you'll see this patch which I wrote to fix the 1.1.0 issue. Could you
please try it under 1.0.12 and see if it fixes your problem?
I should backport the 1.0.12 from testing to etch? Is it OK if I use the
etch version instead? I'll set up a test machine (don't feel like trying
this on a production machine) and see if I can reproduce the memory
leak. I'll then patch nfs-kernel-server and see if the patch works.
--- a/support/export/client.c
+++ b/support/export/client.c
<at> <at> -329,6 +329,7 <at> <at> add_name(char *old, char *add)
strcat(new, ",");
strcat(new, cp);
}
+ free(old);
return new;
}
If this bug is already fixed in new upstream versions (didn't check), do you think it's
possible to backport the fix to stable and ask for it's inclusion in a stable point release?
I believe it should be applicable, but I'm not sure if this is the bug you're
actually seeing. Do you have tons of mounts and umounts?
Define "tons". Since the last time I restarted nfs-kernel-server
(approx. 6 days and 1 hour = 8700 minutes = 522000 secs) the server has
had 264962 umount requests and 343967 mount requests, which is approx 70
reqs/min or 1.17 req/s. It's the machine with the highest NFS load
(counting (u)mount requests, not I/O throughput) we have, but I would
think 1.17 req/s is not "tons"???
--
Rik Theys
KU Leuven - Dept. ESAT
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10
B-3001 LEUVEN - HEVERLEE
Tel.: +32(0)16/32.11.07
----------------------------------------------------------------
<<Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors>>
Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
