On Sun, Aug 20, 2000 at 03:13:23AM -0700, Trent Piepho wrote:
> I checked the memory usage of netrekd with "ps -v", let a shell loop run
> telnets to port 2591 for a while, and then checked again.  Exactly the same
> numbers, no memory leak.  This is with glibc-2.1.3 on intel Linux.  Does doing
> this same thing cause a memory usage increase on your sparc/linux system?

Yes.

[quozl at sage ~]$ ps axu | grep netrekd
quozl    25701  0.1  1.9  5084 3788 ?        S    Aug15   9:08 ./netrekd

[quozl at sage ~]$ while 1
while? telnet localhost 2591>&/dev/null
while? echo -n "."
while? end
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
[quozl at sage ~]$ ps axu|grep netrekd
quozl    25701  0.1  2.1  5344 4048 ?        S    Aug15  10:22 ./netrekd

Note the VSZ and RSS increase.  Note also the CPU time.
So even a metaserver query is likely to not help the problem.

> This one doesn't seem right to me.  The port is set to 0, the port in the
> default .ports file is 2596.  Did you change it to 0?  sock is also 0, which
> shouldn't happen.  It should be -1 if there is no listening socket, or >0 if
> there is.  progname should also be "statistics", and internal should be 1.

I'm not using the default .ports file.  But I am using 2596.  Recall it
is a fixed size array though, so the remaining zero entries are okay.

Here is the .ports file, less comments;

2592 ./ntserv "ntserv"
2591 ./tools/players "players" m
2593 ./ntserv "ntservobs" -q 6
2596 special statistics

Your point about 2596 being missing may be important.

[quozl at sage continuum]$ telnet localhost 2596
Trying 127.0.0.1...
telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused

-- 
James Cameron    mailto:quozl at us.netrek.org     http://quozl.netrek.org/