[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: memory leak, or 'normal' behaviour?
> --On Monday, March 15, 2004 3:10 PM +0100 Pierangelo Masarati
> <email@example.com> wrote:
>> I tried 2.1 release code with simple bind (on Linux RH73)
>> and I don't see any significant growth (steady, after some
>> settlement) and no crash even without sleep.
> You might want to read his note closely -- He compiled against MIT
> Kerberos, which as I've stated at least 500 times already (well, maybe
> not quite *that* many), is full of memory leaks, and cannot handle
> threading at all. His result in relation to the server crashing is
> exactly what one *should* expect.
Sure. I didn't expect it to be so bad... anyway apparently
there are other people reporting at least leaks. I wouldn't
bother too much about it, except that I see people restarting
the server overnight or even closer.