On 2/16/22 17:15, Borja Marcos wrote:
Now I have 9.11.36, 9.16.24 and 9.18.0 What I have noticed with 9.18.0, which is running on the heaviest loaded server, is less memory footprint. I started it on Monday and according to top it’s taking 486 MB (SIZE) - 375 MB (RES). And the memory pressure is much less. It’a working fine but in ISCs tradition of squeezing bad practices it will give you errors for misconfigured domains. I have had to add some “server” clauses disabling cookies and all that. I am updating the server running 9.16.24 to .25. Let’s see how it goes. Running 9.16.24 it takes 1462 MB (size) - 1233 MB (res). I restarted named on 17th January. The load is not exactly the same. They are both part of an anyast pool, but one of them gets more email server requests while the other one receives mostly customer queries.
Awesome feedback! Thanks, Borja :-). Keen to hear what you see re: 9.16.25. Mark. -- Visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information. bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
