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/