unbound: Update to 1.6.0
Message ID | 20161216085019.14362-1-matthias.fischer@ipfire.org |
---|---|
State | Accepted |
Commit | ef2bb434022a72393bbaa270a886ce4cf579901f |
Headers |
Return-Path: <development-bounces@lists.ipfire.org> Received: from mail01.ipfire.org (unknown [172.28.1.200]) by web02.ipfire.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A97F61E71 for <patchwork@ipfire.org>; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 09:50:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail01.ipfire.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail01.ipfire.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 382343CB7; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 09:50:26 +0100 (CET) Received: from Devel.localdomain (p5DD82631.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.216.38.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail01.ipfire.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 207D43C93 for <development@lists.ipfire.org>; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 09:50:24 +0100 (CET) From: Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer@ipfire.org> To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: [PATCH] unbound: Update to 1.6.0 Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 09:50:19 +0100 Message-Id: <20161216085019.14362-1-matthias.fischer@ipfire.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.11.0 X-BeenThere: development@lists.ipfire.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IPFire development talk <development.lists.ipfire.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ipfire.org/mailman/options/development>, <mailto:development-request@lists.ipfire.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.ipfire.org/pipermail/development/> List-Post: <mailto:development@lists.ipfire.org> List-Help: <mailto:development-request@lists.ipfire.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ipfire.org/mailman/listinfo/development>, <mailto:development-request@lists.ipfire.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: development-bounces@lists.ipfire.org Sender: "Development" <development-bounces@lists.ipfire.org> |
Message
Matthias Fischer
Dec. 16, 2016, 7:50 p.m. UTC
Signed-off-by: Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer@ipfire.org>
For details, see:
http://www.unbound.net/download.html
---
config/rootfiles/common/unbound | 2 +-
lfs/unbound | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Comments
Good morning, thanks for the patch. Did you try reverting this one and test if things like "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" resolve again? I have seen that there is some changes for qname minimisation. http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ipfire-2.x.git;a=commitdiff;h=86e9d04bfb73eb256682a567e187fe1e5cdcc3ca -Michael On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 09:50 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: > Signed-off-by: Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer@ipfire.org> > > For details, see: > http://www.unbound.net/download.html > --- > config/rootfiles/common/unbound | 2 +- > lfs/unbound | 4 ++-- > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/config/rootfiles/common/unbound b/config/rootfiles/common/unbound > index 722d73057..c31b8a698 100644 > --- a/config/rootfiles/common/unbound > +++ b/config/rootfiles/common/unbound > @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ etc/unbound/unbound.conf > #usr/lib/libunbound.la > #usr/lib/libunbound.so > usr/lib/libunbound.so.2 > -usr/lib/libunbound.so.2.4.2 > +usr/lib/libunbound.so.2.4.3 > usr/sbin/unbound > usr/sbin/unbound-anchor > usr/sbin/unbound-checkconf > diff --git a/lfs/unbound b/lfs/unbound > index b2ef6ac4c..3494a7b06 100644 > --- a/lfs/unbound > +++ b/lfs/unbound > @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ > > include Config > > -VER = 1.5.10 > +VER = 1.6.0 > > THISAPP = unbound-$(VER) > DL_FILE = $(THISAPP).tar.gz > @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ objects = $(DL_FILE) > > $(DL_FILE) = $(DL_FROM)/$(DL_FILE) > > -$(DL_FILE)_MD5 = 0a3a236811f1ab5c1dc31974fa74e047 > +$(DL_FILE)_MD5 = 78409eccf7260d260b6463f85e59c66b > > install : $(TARGET) >
Hi, On 16.12.2016 11:28, Michael Tremer wrote: > Did you try reverting this one and test if things like > "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" resolve again? I just tested after adding "qname-minimisation: yes" and "harden-below-nxdomain: yes" to '/etc/unbound/unbound.conf', but neither "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" nor its ip-address "172.28.1.165" answered. No connection through browser, ping loss on both = 100%. With or without, I get the following answer with 'dig': ... root@ipfire: /etc/unbound # dig pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org ; <<>> DiG 9.10.3-P4 <<>> pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 45016 ;; flags: qr rd ra ad; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. 293 IN A 172.28.1.165 ;; Query time: 0 msec ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) ;; WHEN: Fri Dec 16 12:33:28 CET 2016 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 70 ... Best, Matthias
Hi, that server is not available from the internet. But that you get that IP address is enough for me. That didn't happen before. I will revert that commit and we will see in the testing if this raises any problems again... Best, -Michael On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 12:47 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: > Hi, > > On 16.12.2016 11:28, Michael Tremer wrote: > > > > Did you try reverting this one and test if things like > > "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" resolve again? > > I just tested after adding "qname-minimisation: yes" and > "harden-below-nxdomain: yes" to '/etc/unbound/unbound.conf', but neither > "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" nor its ip-address "172.28.1.165" answered. > > No connection through browser, ping loss on both = 100%. > > With or without, I get the following answer with 'dig': > > ... > root@ipfire: /etc/unbound # dig pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org > > ; <<>> DiG 9.10.3-P4 <<>> pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org > ;; global options: +cmd > ;; Got answer: > ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 45016 > ;; flags: qr rd ra ad; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 > > ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: > ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 > ;; QUESTION SECTION: > ;pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. IN A > > ;; ANSWER SECTION: > pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. 293 IN A 172.28.1.165 > > ;; Query time: 0 msec > ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) > ;; WHEN: Fri Dec 16 12:33:28 CET 2016 > ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 70 > ... > > Best, > Matthias >
Hi, unbound 1.6.0 - with reverted commit - is running here since a few hours without seen problems so far - we'll see. One question, being curious: Could it make sense to compile 'unbound' using '--with-pthreads' for threading support? I got the following in '_build.ipfire.log' right now: ... checking for the pthreads library -lpthreads... no checking whether pthreads work without any flags... no checking whether pthreads work with -Kthread... no checking whether pthreads work with -kthread... no checking for the pthreads library -llthread... no checking whether pthreads work with -pthread... yes checking for joinable pthread attribute... PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE checking if more special flags are required for pthreads... no checking for PTHREAD_PRIO_INHERIT... yes checking for pthread_spinlock_t... yes checking for pthread_rwlock_t... yes checking if -pthread unused during linking... no ... In this regard, I read https://www.unbound.net/documentation/howto_optimise.html, but I'm not so skilled in programming to judge whether this would lead to any advantages... Best, Matthias On 16.12.2016 12:59, Michael Tremer wrote: > Hi, > > that server is not available from the internet. But that you get that IP address > is enough for me. That didn't happen before. > > I will revert that commit and we will see in the testing if this raises any > problems again... > > Best, > -Michael > > On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 12:47 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 16.12.2016 11:28, Michael Tremer wrote: >> > >> > Did you try reverting this one and test if things like >> > "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" resolve again? >> >> I just tested after adding "qname-minimisation: yes" and >> "harden-below-nxdomain: yes" to '/etc/unbound/unbound.conf', but neither >> "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" nor its ip-address "172.28.1.165" answered. >> >> No connection through browser, ping loss on both = 100%. >> >> With or without, I get the following answer with 'dig': >> >> ... >> root@ipfire: /etc/unbound # dig pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org >> >> ; <<>> DiG 9.10.3-P4 <<>> pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org >> ;; global options: +cmd >> ;; Got answer: >> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 45016 >> ;; flags: qr rd ra ad; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 >> >> ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: >> ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 >> ;; QUESTION SECTION: >> ;pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. IN A >> >> ;; ANSWER SECTION: >> pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. 293 IN A 172.28.1.165 >> >> ;; Query time: 0 msec >> ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) >> ;; WHEN: Fri Dec 16 12:33:28 CET 2016 >> ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 70 >> ... >> >> Best, >> Matthias >> >
What else is it using for threading right now? On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 16:44 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: > Hi, > > unbound 1.6.0 - with reverted commit - is running here since a few hours > without seen problems so far - we'll see. > > One question, being curious: > > Could it make sense to compile 'unbound' using '--with-pthreads' for > threading support? > > I got the following in '_build.ipfire.log' right now: > > ... > checking for the pthreads library -lpthreads... no > checking whether pthreads work without any flags... no > checking whether pthreads work with -Kthread... no > checking whether pthreads work with -kthread... no > checking for the pthreads library -llthread... no > checking whether pthreads work with -pthread... yes > checking for joinable pthread attribute... PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE > checking if more special flags are required for pthreads... no > checking for PTHREAD_PRIO_INHERIT... yes > checking for pthread_spinlock_t... yes > checking for pthread_rwlock_t... yes > checking if -pthread unused during linking... no > ... > > In this regard, I read > https://www.unbound.net/documentation/howto_optimise.html, but I'm not > so skilled in programming to judge whether this would lead to any > advantages... > > Best, > Matthias > > On 16.12.2016 12:59, Michael Tremer wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > that server is not available from the internet. But that you get that IP > > address > > is enough for me. That didn't happen before. > > > > I will revert that commit and we will see in the testing if this raises any > > problems again... > > > > Best, > > -Michael > > > > On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 12:47 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > On 16.12.2016 11:28, Michael Tremer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you try reverting this one and test if things like > > > > "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" resolve again? > > > > > > I just tested after adding "qname-minimisation: yes" and > > > "harden-below-nxdomain: yes" to '/etc/unbound/unbound.conf', but neither > > > "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" nor its ip-address "172.28.1.165" answered. > > > > > > No connection through browser, ping loss on both = 100%. > > > > > > With or without, I get the following answer with 'dig': > > > > > > ... > > > root@ipfire: /etc/unbound # dig pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org > > > > > > ; <<>> DiG 9.10.3-P4 <<>> pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org > > > ;; global options: +cmd > > > ;; Got answer: > > > ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 45016 > > > ;; flags: qr rd ra ad; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 > > > > > > ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: > > > ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 > > > ;; QUESTION SECTION: > > > ;pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. IN A > > > > > > ;; ANSWER SECTION: > > > pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. 293 IN A 172.28.1.165 > > > > > > ;; Query time: 0 msec > > > ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) > > > ;; WHEN: Fri Dec 16 12:33:28 CET 2016 > > > ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 70 > > > ... > > > > > > Best, > > > Matthias > > > > > >
Hi, As far as I can see, it uses one thread per processor as set through the init-file. Here, the generated 'tuning.conf' contains "num-threads: 2", which is ok, the machine has two cores. The question is, what differences would compiling with '--with-pthreads' make? This option came to my view, but I don't know if this would make anything better. Best, Matthias On 16.12.2016 17:13, Michael Tremer wrote: > What else is it using for threading right now? > > On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 16:44 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: >> Hi, >> >> unbound 1.6.0 - with reverted commit - is running here since a few hours >> without seen problems so far - we'll see. >> >> One question, being curious: >> >> Could it make sense to compile 'unbound' using '--with-pthreads' for >> threading support? >> >> I got the following in '_build.ipfire.log' right now: >> >> ... >> checking for the pthreads library -lpthreads... no >> checking whether pthreads work without any flags... no >> checking whether pthreads work with -Kthread... no >> checking whether pthreads work with -kthread... no >> checking for the pthreads library -llthread... no >> checking whether pthreads work with -pthread... yes >> checking for joinable pthread attribute... PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE >> checking if more special flags are required for pthreads... no >> checking for PTHREAD_PRIO_INHERIT... yes >> checking for pthread_spinlock_t... yes >> checking for pthread_rwlock_t... yes >> checking if -pthread unused during linking... no >> ... >> >> In this regard, I read >> https://www.unbound.net/documentation/howto_optimise.html, but I'm not >> so skilled in programming to judge whether this would lead to any >> advantages... >> >> Best, >> Matthias >> >> On 16.12.2016 12:59, Michael Tremer wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > that server is not available from the internet. But that you get that IP >> > address >> > is enough for me. That didn't happen before. >> > >> > I will revert that commit and we will see in the testing if this raises any >> > problems again... >> > >> > Best, >> > -Michael >> > >> > On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 12:47 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > On 16.12.2016 11:28, Michael Tremer wrote: >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Did you try reverting this one and test if things like >> > > > "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" resolve again? >> > > >> > > I just tested after adding "qname-minimisation: yes" and >> > > "harden-below-nxdomain: yes" to '/etc/unbound/unbound.conf', but neither >> > > "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" nor its ip-address "172.28.1.165" answered. >> > > >> > > No connection through browser, ping loss on both = 100%. >> > > >> > > With or without, I get the following answer with 'dig': >> > > >> > > ... >> > > root@ipfire: /etc/unbound # dig pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org >> > > >> > > ; <<>> DiG 9.10.3-P4 <<>> pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org >> > > ;; global options: +cmd >> > > ;; Got answer: >> > > ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 45016 >> > > ;; flags: qr rd ra ad; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 >> > > >> > > ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: >> > > ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 >> > > ;; QUESTION SECTION: >> > > ;pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. IN A >> > > >> > > ;; ANSWER SECTION: >> > > pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. 293 IN A 172.28.1.165 >> > > >> > > ;; Query time: 0 msec >> > > ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) >> > > ;; WHEN: Fri Dec 16 12:33:28 CET 2016 >> > > ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 70 >> > > ... >> > > >> > > Best, >> > > Matthias >> > > >> > >> >
On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 17:39 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: > Hi, > > As far as I can see, it uses one thread per processor as set through the > init-file. > > Here, the generated 'tuning.conf' contains "num-threads: 2", which is > ok, the machine has two cores. We always set that to the number of active processors, yes. > The question is, what differences would compiling with '--with-pthreads' > make? This option came to my view, but I don't know if this would make > anything better. Try it out them. The number of threads will be the same but it should definitely use pthreads then which is the fastest implmentation of threads in Linux. There is a few things outside glibc, but I cannot imagine that unbound is using anything else but pthreads already. -Michael > > Best, > Matthias > > On 16.12.2016 17:13, Michael Tremer wrote: > > > > What else is it using for threading right now? > > > > On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 16:44 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > unbound 1.6.0 - with reverted commit - is running here since a few hours > > > without seen problems so far - we'll see. > > > > > > One question, being curious: > > > > > > Could it make sense to compile 'unbound' using '--with-pthreads' for > > > threading support? > > > > > > I got the following in '_build.ipfire.log' right now: > > > > > > ... > > > checking for the pthreads library -lpthreads... no > > > checking whether pthreads work without any flags... no > > > checking whether pthreads work with -Kthread... no > > > checking whether pthreads work with -kthread... no > > > checking for the pthreads library -llthread... no > > > checking whether pthreads work with -pthread... yes > > > checking for joinable pthread attribute... PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE > > > checking if more special flags are required for pthreads... no > > > checking for PTHREAD_PRIO_INHERIT... yes > > > checking for pthread_spinlock_t... yes > > > checking for pthread_rwlock_t... yes > > > checking if -pthread unused during linking... no > > > ... > > > > > > In this regard, I read > > > https://www.unbound.net/documentation/howto_optimise.html, but I'm not > > > so skilled in programming to judge whether this would lead to any > > > advantages... > > > > > > Best, > > > Matthias > > > > > > On 16.12.2016 12:59, Michael Tremer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > that server is not available from the internet. But that you get that IP > > > > address > > > > is enough for me. That didn't happen before. > > > > > > > > I will revert that commit and we will see in the testing if this raises > > > > any > > > > problems again... > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > -Michael > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 12:47 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > On 16.12.2016 11:28, Michael Tremer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you try reverting this one and test if things like > > > > > > "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" resolve again? > > > > > > > > > > I just tested after adding "qname-minimisation: yes" and > > > > > "harden-below-nxdomain: yes" to '/etc/unbound/unbound.conf', but > > > > > neither > > > > > "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" nor its ip-address "172.28.1.165" > > > > > answered. > > > > > > > > > > No connection through browser, ping loss on both = 100%. > > > > > > > > > > With or without, I get the following answer with 'dig': > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > root@ipfire: /etc/unbound # dig pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org > > > > > > > > > > ; <<>> DiG 9.10.3-P4 <<>> pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org > > > > > ;; global options: +cmd > > > > > ;; Got answer: > > > > > ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 45016 > > > > > ;; flags: qr rd ra ad; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: > > > > > 1 > > > > > > > > > > ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: > > > > > ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 > > > > > ;; QUESTION SECTION: > > > > > ;pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. IN A > > > > > > > > > > ;; ANSWER SECTION: > > > > > pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. 293 IN A 172.28.1.165 > > > > > > > > > > ;; Query time: 0 msec > > > > > ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) > > > > > ;; WHEN: Fri Dec 16 12:33:28 CET 2016 > > > > > ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 70 > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > Matthias > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Hi, it made absolutely NO difference. Binarys were identical, too. 'configure' contains: ... # Check whether --with-pthreads was given. if test "${with_pthreads+set}" = set; then : withval=$with_pthreads; else withval="yes" fi ... Can it be that its enabled automatically, if no option is given!? *sigh* Best, Matthias On 16.12.2016 17:42, Michael Tremer wrote: > On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 17:39 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: >> Hi, >> >> As far as I can see, it uses one thread per processor as set through the >> init-file. >> >> Here, the generated 'tuning.conf' contains "num-threads: 2", which is >> ok, the machine has two cores. > > We always set that to the number of active processors, yes. > >> The question is, what differences would compiling with '--with-pthreads' >> make? This option came to my view, but I don't know if this would make >> anything better. > > Try it out them. The number of threads will be the same but it should definitely > use pthreads then which is the fastest implmentation of threads in Linux. There > is a few things outside glibc, but I cannot imagine that unbound is using > anything else but pthreads already. > > -Michael > >> >> Best, >> Matthias >> >> On 16.12.2016 17:13, Michael Tremer wrote: >> > >> > What else is it using for threading right now? >> > >> > On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 16:44 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > unbound 1.6.0 - with reverted commit - is running here since a few hours >> > > without seen problems so far - we'll see. >> > > >> > > One question, being curious: >> > > >> > > Could it make sense to compile 'unbound' using '--with-pthreads' for >> > > threading support? >> > > >> > > I got the following in '_build.ipfire.log' right now: >> > > >> > > ... >> > > checking for the pthreads library -lpthreads... no >> > > checking whether pthreads work without any flags... no >> > > checking whether pthreads work with -Kthread... no >> > > checking whether pthreads work with -kthread... no >> > > checking for the pthreads library -llthread... no >> > > checking whether pthreads work with -pthread... yes >> > > checking for joinable pthread attribute... PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE >> > > checking if more special flags are required for pthreads... no >> > > checking for PTHREAD_PRIO_INHERIT... yes >> > > checking for pthread_spinlock_t... yes >> > > checking for pthread_rwlock_t... yes >> > > checking if -pthread unused during linking... no >> > > ... >> > > >> > > In this regard, I read >> > > https://www.unbound.net/documentation/howto_optimise.html, but I'm not >> > > so skilled in programming to judge whether this would lead to any >> > > advantages... >> > > >> > > Best, >> > > Matthias >> > > >> > > On 16.12.2016 12:59, Michael Tremer wrote: >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Hi, >> > > > >> > > > that server is not available from the internet. But that you get that IP >> > > > address >> > > > is enough for me. That didn't happen before. >> > > > >> > > > I will revert that commit and we will see in the testing if this raises >> > > > any >> > > > problems again... >> > > > >> > > > Best, >> > > > -Michael >> > > > >> > > > On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 12:47 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Hi, >> > > > > >> > > > > On 16.12.2016 11:28, Michael Tremer wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Did you try reverting this one and test if things like >> > > > > > "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" resolve again? >> > > > > >> > > > > I just tested after adding "qname-minimisation: yes" and >> > > > > "harden-below-nxdomain: yes" to '/etc/unbound/unbound.conf', but >> > > > > neither >> > > > > "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" nor its ip-address "172.28.1.165" >> > > > > answered. >> > > > > >> > > > > No connection through browser, ping loss on both = 100%. >> > > > > >> > > > > With or without, I get the following answer with 'dig': >> > > > > >> > > > > ... >> > > > > root@ipfire: /etc/unbound # dig pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org >> > > > > >> > > > > ; <<>> DiG 9.10.3-P4 <<>> pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org >> > > > > ;; global options: +cmd >> > > > > ;; Got answer: >> > > > > ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 45016 >> > > > > ;; flags: qr rd ra ad; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: >> > > > > 1 >> > > > > >> > > > > ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: >> > > > > ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 >> > > > > ;; QUESTION SECTION: >> > > > > ;pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. IN A >> > > > > >> > > > > ;; ANSWER SECTION: >> > > > > pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. 293 IN A 172.28.1.165 >> > > > > >> > > > > ;; Query time: 0 msec >> > > > > ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) >> > > > > ;; WHEN: Fri Dec 16 12:33:28 CET 2016 >> > > > > ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 70 >> > > > > ... >> > > > > >> > > > > Best, >> > > > > Matthias >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >
On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 18:52 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: > Hi, > > it made absolutely NO difference. Binarys were identical, too. > > 'configure' contains: > > ... > # Check whether --with-pthreads was given. > if test "${with_pthreads+set}" = set; then : > withval=$with_pthreads; > else > withval="yes" > fi > ... > > Can it be that its enabled automatically, if no option is given!? *sigh* Yeah, it must be the default then :) -Michael > > Best, > Matthias > > On 16.12.2016 17:42, Michael Tremer wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 17:39 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > As far as I can see, it uses one thread per processor as set through the > > > init-file. > > > > > > Here, the generated 'tuning.conf' contains "num-threads: 2", which is > > > ok, the machine has two cores. > > > > We always set that to the number of active processors, yes. > > > > > > > > The question is, what differences would compiling with '--with-pthreads' > > > make? This option came to my view, but I don't know if this would make > > > anything better. > > > > Try it out them. The number of threads will be the same but it should > > definitely > > use pthreads then which is the fastest implmentation of threads in Linux. > > There > > is a few things outside glibc, but I cannot imagine that unbound is using > > anything else but pthreads already. > > > > -Michael > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > Matthias > > > > > > On 16.12.2016 17:13, Michael Tremer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > What else is it using for threading right now? > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 16:44 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > unbound 1.6.0 - with reverted commit - is running here since a few > > > > > hours > > > > > without seen problems so far - we'll see. > > > > > > > > > > One question, being curious: > > > > > > > > > > Could it make sense to compile 'unbound' using '--with-pthreads' for > > > > > threading support? > > > > > > > > > > I got the following in '_build.ipfire.log' right now: > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > checking for the pthreads library -lpthreads... no > > > > > checking whether pthreads work without any flags... no > > > > > checking whether pthreads work with -Kthread... no > > > > > checking whether pthreads work with -kthread... no > > > > > checking for the pthreads library -llthread... no > > > > > checking whether pthreads work with -pthread... yes > > > > > checking for joinable pthread attribute... PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE > > > > > checking if more special flags are required for pthreads... no > > > > > checking for PTHREAD_PRIO_INHERIT... yes > > > > > checking for pthread_spinlock_t... yes > > > > > checking for pthread_rwlock_t... yes > > > > > checking if -pthread unused during linking... no > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > In this regard, I read > > > > > https://www.unbound.net/documentation/howto_optimise.html, but I'm not > > > > > so skilled in programming to judge whether this would lead to any > > > > > advantages... > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > Matthias > > > > > > > > > > On 16.12.2016 12:59, Michael Tremer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > that server is not available from the internet. But that you get > > > > > > that IP > > > > > > address > > > > > > is enough for me. That didn't happen before. > > > > > > > > > > > > I will revert that commit and we will see in the testing if this > > > > > > raises > > > > > > any > > > > > > problems again... > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > -Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 12:47 +0100, Matthias Fischer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 16.12.2016 11:28, Michael Tremer wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you try reverting this one and test if things like > > > > > > > > "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" resolve again? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I just tested after adding "qname-minimisation: yes" and > > > > > > > "harden-below-nxdomain: yes" to '/etc/unbound/unbound.conf', but > > > > > > > neither > > > > > > > "pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org" nor its ip-address "172.28.1.165" > > > > > > > answered. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No connection through browser, ping loss on both = 100%. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With or without, I get the following answer with 'dig': > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > root@ipfire: /etc/unbound # dig pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ; <<>> DiG 9.10.3-P4 <<>> pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org > > > > > > > ;; global options: +cmd > > > > > > > ;; Got answer: > > > > > > > ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 45016 > > > > > > > ;; flags: qr rd ra ad; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, > > > > > > > ADDITIONAL: > > > > > > > 1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: > > > > > > > ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 > > > > > > > ;; QUESTION SECTION: > > > > > > > ;pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. IN A > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ;; ANSWER SECTION: > > > > > > > pakfirehub01.i.ipfire.org. 293 IN A 172.28.1.165 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ;; Query time: 0 msec > > > > > > > ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1) > > > > > > > ;; WHEN: Fri Dec 16 12:33:28 CET 2016 > > > > > > > ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 70 > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > Matthias > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >