Varnish virtual memory usage

[Ken Brownfield]

Hopefully your upper management allows you to install contemporary  
software and distributions.  Otherwise memory leaks and x86_64 would  
be the least of your concerns.  Honestly, you're waiting for Varnish  
to stabilize and you're running v1?

My data point: 5 months and over 100PB of transfers, and 2.0.4 is  
stable and has never leaked in our pure x86_64 production  
environment.  Its memory use can be precisely monitored and controlled  
between Varnish configuration and the OS environment by any competent  
sysadmin, IMHO.  We actually can't use Squid at all because it really  
does leak like a sieve.  pmap does not lie.

I just hope that people that have problems with any software are  
taking on the responsibility of diagnosing their own environments as  
much as they expect any OSS project to diagnose its code -- the former  
is just as often the problem as the latter.
-- 
Ken


On Nov 5, 2009, at 12:22 PM, cripy wrote:

> I experienced this same issue under x64.  Varnish seemed great but  
> once I put some real traffic on it under x64 the memory leaks began  
> and it would eventually crash/restart.
>
> Ended up putting Varnish on the back burner and have been waiting  
> for it to stabilize before even trying to present it to upper  
> management again.
>
> Varnish has great potential but until it can run stable under x64  
> it's got a long fight ahead of itself.
>
> (I do want to note that my comments are based mainly on varnish 1  
> and not varnish 2.0)
>
> --cripy

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/pipermail/varnish-misc/attachments/20091105/35b0a033/attachment-0001.html>