On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Allan Fields wrote: > On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 03:19:27PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote: >> I don't know if this is applicable to -current as well, but so far, >> anything like this I've uncovered in 4.x has needed an equivalent fix in >> 5.x, so figured it can't hurt to ask, especially with everyone working >> towards a STABLE 5.x branch ... I do not have a 5.x machine running this >> sort of load at the moment, so can't test, or provide feedback there ... >> all my 5.x machines are more or less desktops ... >> >> On Saturday, I'm going to try an unmount of the bigger file system, to see >> if it frees everything up without a reboot ... but if someone can suggest >> something to check to see if it is a) a leak and b) is fixable between now >> and then, please let me know ... again, this is a 4.10 system, but most of >> the work that Tor and David have done (re: vnodes) in the past relating to >> my servers have been applied to 5.x first, and MFC'd afterwards, so I >> suspect that this too many be something that applies to both branches ... > > Unmounting the filesystems will call vflush() and should flush all > vnodes from under that mount point. I'm not entirely sure if this > is the best you can do w/o rebooting. Understood, and agreed ... *but* ... is there a way, before I do that, of determining if this is something that needs to be fixed at the OS level? Is there a leak here that I can somehow identify while its in this state? The server has *only* been up 25 days ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy_at_hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664Received on Wed Sep 01 2004 - 19:42:27 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:10 UTC