[c-nsp] 7500 having problems after upgrade from 12.0.19S2 to12.0.31S1

[Rodney Dunn]

You are correct. That image size gives you enough headroom.

Rodney

On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 04:07:15PM +0200, Corneliu Tanasa wrote:
> Rodney, I think that it depends on the feature set you're running.  At least
> for ISV, I'm running 2 full feeds, plus one half feed on a RSP4 and it works
> very well for months with 12.3.x (currently 12.3.16)
>                 Head    Total(b)     Used(b)     Free(b)   Lowest(b)
> Largest(b)
> Processor   4349E4E0   213261088   180534804    32726284     6923904
> 6028088
>      Fast   4347E4E0      131072      102872       28200       28200
> 28156
> 
> Current uptime: uptime is 7 weeks, 4 days, 16 hours, 52 minutes
> 
> Corneliu
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Rodney Dunn
> Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 3:48 PM
> To: Robert E.Seastrom
> Cc: CLAEREBOUDT Elke; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net; Jon Lewis
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 7500 having problems after upgrade from 12.0.19S2
> to12.0.31S1
> 
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 08:14:42AM -0500, Robert E.Seastrom wrote:
> > Jon Lewis <jlewis at lewis.org> writes:
> > 
> > > On Tue, 22 Nov 2005, CLAEREBOUDT Elke wrote:
> > >
> > >> We've upgraded a 7500 from 12.0.19S2 to 12.0.31S1 , RSP has 256K of
> > >> memory. After 10 days router started to misbehave and we had to isolate
> > >> it from the network. Cisco case opened gave us the answer, you need
> 512M
> > >> on a rsp when it has more then 100K routes (has 170K). Cpu is very
> > >> unstable and points to snmp engine.
> > >
> > > What was your free mem under 12.0.19S2?  Assuming it was considerably 
> > > more, I'd say there's bugs/memory leaks in the new IOS.  I've got
> several 
> > > RSP4's with full BGP routes and 40-50mb free, all running 12.2(18)S.
> > 
> > ST merge was after 12.0(21)S.  The new BGP data structure is said to
> > be more computationally efficient at the expense of memory efficiency.
> 
> Absolutely correct. However, there is a memory gain too in that
> for a full reconvergence it takes much much less transient memory
> to reconverge.
> 
> Not pointed at Robert but a general comment:
> 
> We can't code new features without making the image larger.
> We do (even though some may not think so) try very very hard to
> be extremely memory conscious when we code new features. The
> mistake we've made is having parts where they memory can't be
> upgraded and we are trying to not make that mistake again.
> 
> 256M is simply not enough anymore for dual feeds and recent code.
> 
> Rodney
> 
> > 
> >                                         ---Rob
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/