On Tue, 16 Aug 2005, Rui Paulo wrote:

> On 2005.08.16 03:24:00 +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> | In article <20050816013054.GA7112@proton.internal.fnop.net>,
> | Rui Paulo  <rpaulo@NetBSD.org> wrote:
> | >-=-=-=-=-=-
> | >
> | >On 2005.08.14 23:10:14 +0000, Mipam wrote:
> | >| --- Makefile.inc.original	2005-08-14 23:29:23.000000000 +0200
> | >| +++ Makefile.inc	2005-08-14 23:29:43.000000000 +0200
> | >| @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
> | >|  
> | >|  WARNS?=	1
> | >|  WFORMAT?=2
> | >| -NAMED_USE_PTHREADS?=yes
> | >| +NAMED_USE_PTHREADS?=no
> | >|  
> | >|  .include <bsd.own.mk>
> | >
> | >Yes, that's just what we need, I guess.
> | >Can someone responsible/knowledge for bind comment on this ?
> | 
> | Named works fine for me with pthreads for me on shark, i386, sparc,
> | and sparc64.  While there might be memory allocation bugs with
> | pthreads and bind I have not hit them, but my usage is not
> | representative (I am just using a cacheing name server on most of
> | these machines).  I am a bit torn about turning pthreads off by
> | default. On one hand it is better to be safe and release with
> | pthreads turned off on our release branches, but on the other hand
> | I'd like to keep bind threaded at head since it is the only (?)
> | threaded daemon in our source tree and that should help testing
> | our pthreads code. Importing a new version of bind on NetBSD should
> | be relatively easy now, so if this bug is already fixed, we can
> | import the new bind in NetBSD-current.
> 
> So, what about disabling pthreads on netbsd-3, only ? I don't think
> that BIND 9.3.1 fixes any of this issues, but I may be wrong.

Right, bind 9.3.1 doesnt solve these problems. That's why FreeBSD 
turned threading off in bind 9.3.1 which they use in RELENG_5 and 
higher. Bind 9.4.0 will correct these issues and will 
perform better than 9.3.x
Bye,

Mipam.